CANEXUS CORP 6.5 PCT DEBS T.CUS.DB.D

I just don't get it...

[philip3]

I thought all the NATO damage was priced in at $5.00
It seems like the market forgot this was a $6.00 stock based on chemicals alone.
CUS doesn't get paid based on the price of oil, just paid to ship it.
I can't see less oil getting shipped because of price; certainly not in the next 3 -9 months anyway.
So what possible reason can there be for the stock price getting cut in half?
A statement from the company would go a long way right now. 

PS: Already averaged down (well above here) and ain't doing it again.

[bigkagan]

it could be an automatic tax-selling, the computers are programmed to sell losing stocks at the end of the year and they don't care about all the complexities which you mention

[bigkagan]

I've heard Kevin O'Leary say today that he's buying the MLP's because they will be making money even when oil is down and CUS is just like an MLP since it transports oil

[mike49]

the rational head might conclude that,for the time being,oil to rail in canada has caught up to growth.the value in nato was 2 years ago,unfortunately.if cus gets to break even on nato then it should be considered a plus so do the math re share price.the chem side is going to have to start all over again to build confidence with investors. on the plus side,any sustainable divvy will be chased

[bigkagan]

CUS will sell Nato in December to CP or CNR probably

[mike49]

CUS will sell Nato in December to CP or CNR probably not a chance. my guess is cenovus( i assume they are the customer who cancelled contract),secure energy(beefing up their terminal operations),gibson(for the storage and/or truck business),or private money from the states("north american interest in nato"). or maybe superior buys the whole works and deals nato down the road. probably

[Kherson]

Call up the IR folks and ask them what exactly is the present operating rate of Blunderheim. It is no where's near the believed rate of 40%. Canexus has been publicly fudging their Blunderheim info for quite sometime now... Kherson

[Kherson]

[Kherson]

Posted December 13, 2014... Kherson

[Kherson]

Looks to me Philip3 like you do have alot of questions that need to be answered. The first answer would be bad management... Kherson

[Jackroy]

I don't think we can conclude yet that the new management is bad management Kershon. It is way to early for that. Is the Dividend toast.... probably a % of it, but I doubt all of it. I agree with the board.... sometimes you get so negative on a stock that you can't stop thinking about it. Time to stop thinking about it and move on

[6milli]

Agreed. This Doug guy sounds pretty no nonsense to me. Says it like it is. Sounds like a prudent decision maker with regard to the NATO asset i.e. clearly off-focus for the company and so going through the process of divestiture, however if the market does not currently offer full enough value of the asset they will continue to operate the asset until such time as the market recovers. That's

[Kherson]

I think you are missing my point folks, I actually think that Doug is indeed doing a good job, it's his two vice presidents, Diane and Rich that need the boot. How anyone in their shoes can justify selling their stock last year is beyond common sense considering all that the company has gone through. To have Diane unload her stock on August 8th and then have the tie-in issues on the 20th