Join today and have your say! It’s FREE!

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Please Try Again
{{ error }}
By providing my email, I consent to receiving investment related electronic messages from Stockhouse.

or

Sign In

Please Try Again
{{ error }}
Password Hint : {{passwordHint}}
Forgot Password?

or

Please Try Again {{ error }}

Send my password

SUCCESS
An email was sent with password retrieval instructions. Please go to the link in the email message to retrieve your password.

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Quote  |  Bullboard  |  News  |  Opinion  |  Profile  |  Peers  |  Filings  |  Financials  |  Options  |  Price History  |  Ratios  |  Ownership  |  Insiders  |  Valuation

Bullboard - Stock Discussion Forum LITHIUM X ENERGY CORP V.LIX

"Lithium X Energy Corp is a lithium resource explorer and developer. It is focused on supplying the lithium battery industry. The company’s property includes Sal de Los Angeles lithium-potash brine project (the SDLA Project), in Argentina's Salta Province."

TSXV:LIX - Post Discussion

LITHIUM X ENERGY CORP > Materiality Argument Won't Work (my guess permit was fine)
View:
Post by JoelBirkin on Sep 23, 2017 10:34pm

Materiality Argument Won't Work (my guess permit was fine)

I am starting to think maybe the permits never got suspended and there never was a drilling blow up issue. 

I say that because the non-disclosure of this (if this is true) is such a blatant violation of the rules that they would have no defense whatsoever and would all be sued by investors (US class action for sure by those hungry US litigators), regulators, suspensions, fines, loss of reputation etc. 

If the permits got suspended and LIX did not disclose I assume their defense would be "this was not a material event" and therefore no disclosure required. The only disclosure required would be maybe in their quarterly or annual disclosures (as IKN notes). 

LIX has 2 assets: Los Angeles and Arizaro. Los Angeles is their flagship project (even check LIX's website where there is a map of the projects and Los Angeles has a Flag on it and gold box). Also, Los Angeles has a resource on it, cost more to buy, and is the focus of the company for the feasilbity study. 

My point is the "materiality" defense LIX may raise is a weak attempt and likely won't stand up to investors or the regulators. 

The board of LIX contains some respected and experienced people so it is baffling to even entertain the possibility that they decided to withhold this information from the public....but then again Home Capital and Equifax did it too.....so who knows...

I guess we hang tight to see what LIX says and then regardless we wait weeks, months or years before the regulators pounce. 

I DON'T THINK THE PERMIT GOT SUSPENDED A FEW MONTHS AGO BECAUSE LIX WOULD HAVE KNOWN HOW RISKY AND STUPID THAT WOULD BE TO NOT DISCLOSE THIS INFORMATION TO THE PUBLIC

Remeber also, this issue is not about the assets or potential but rather the management/directors and the fallout from it IF the IKN story is true...he better hope it is otherwise he will for sure get sued and lose
Comment by Loudermilk on Sep 23, 2017 11:28pm
Something of this gravity would of been impossible to hide, you would think the share price would of suffered, cratering after the word got out. Yet LIX has traded around the $2 range throughout the summer, a period when trading is at its weakest.
Comment by Dtraders1 on Sep 24, 2017 12:09am
All this story doesn’t make any sense.  No court hearing, no major accident on the environment on the news, no injurries reported on the web, no news in google about an accident in Argentina involving Lix, seriously all this doesn’t add up.  I am trying to research something that could lead to this.  Also like I said earlier, I waited almost 10 months to have an update on phase 1 in ...more  
Comment by foundryman on Sep 24, 2017 12:36am
That's the only reason I maintain that there's still a slight chance Otto has some of the story wrong, or its not as bad as it appears on the surface. You would think with the people involved, the fact that there was a video of the well blowing up, executives are big names with long-standing reputations, etc. that something this significant couldn't have been hidden for so long. I hear ...more  
Comment by LithiumNPV on Sep 24, 2017 5:40pm
It could be a a semi-blow up and a partial permit suspension so it is in that grey area.
The Market Update
{{currentVideo.title}} {{currentVideo.relativeTime}}
< Previous bulletin
Next bulletin >

At the Bell logo
A daily snapshot of everything
from market open to close.

{{currentVideo.companyName}}
{{currentVideo.intervieweeName}}{{currentVideo.intervieweeTitle}}
< Previous
Next >
Dealroom for high-potential pre-IPO opportunities