or
Remember me
Back
KenoHillYT wrote: Not everyone agrees with YTG summarily applying for receivership was a brilliant decision. This is also not about the C-suite staying on board. Once JM was fired by PWC under recievership the gig was up. The point is, was this decision for recievership just punitive punishment and if so by whom. I'm quite abrasive too sometimes so what. Doesn't change the fact that the instant VG was placed in receivership VG just became a liability for everyone (suppliers, employees, shareholders, etc.). https://www.yukonparty.ca/statement_from_the_yukon_party_on_yg_court_filing_against_victoria_gold The second PWC "fired" JM and the C-suit left along with the BoD the owners and team involved became a non-issue. They are off the hook unless someone can come with deliberate behaviour that they caused the a sabotage of the mine. No ones going to attempt to drag the defunct C-suite and BoD into court because then YTG and all others professionals that designed and did the ongoing inspections and reporting are going to get dragged in. Never going to happen, if it does it will be a first. Maybe they handed the JM team a gift. :) If JM was so abrasive and so hard to work with that he needed to be fired by PwC the rub is he's not an employee and if YTG said we left the gate open for a return who believes the "abrasive" JM is going to come back. I know what I would say. :) This could end up being the worst decision ever made. We'll see. https://www.yukon-news.com/news/victoria-gold-enters-receivership-plans-made-for-key-phase-of-cleanup-through-the-fall-7490005 https://www.yukon-news.com/news/victoria-gold-contributes-1-million-to-first-nation-of-na-cho-nyak-dun-7000746
Receive investor kits and email updates from Stockhouse and directly from these companies.
