| | | " After being bent over with no lube by Teck at their prime property" ?
It may have controversially been suggested somewhere. If "by" is the proper term.
No legal obligation that I am aware of that the deal had to be accepted. If it is really such a great and fantastic property as was promoted to be, and still is in the minds of many. Would it not have sold for a larger upfront cash price than the $24 M received, on the open market ? Would it not have brought more than the 19 cent prospective valuation, with the Liard and other claims CUU holds included ?
If it had to wait a bit for a buyer to confirm. Are they not waiting now ? The way it is, there is no competition. Which may have been generated in the open market.
I view it as, the project must not be as valuable as the numbers were interpreted to be. Or they should have held out for a better deal on behalf of all shareholders concerned.
The least they could do now, is offer some economic reasoning. Justifying why the original Salazar deal had to be replaced. That would be simple courtesy, to the folks beyond Ernesto who put up hard earned money. In not doing so in my opinion, suggests a disregard for the retail investors |
|
