That's a common theory, JP, but one I have difficulty swallowing -- like yesterday's news!
<g>Could the Ashton parent company want the price to drop so that they can increase their interest in Ashton Canada? Anyone know the legalities of this sort of move?<g>
If they were inclined to increase their interest I'm sure they would like to do so at a lower cost.
The question you were getting at, I think, was would the parent company encourage ACA to "spin" unfavorable news in order to create a less expensive buying opportunity?
The answer, in my opinion, is a definite no. Here are some reason:
1. Duty of loyalty....directors have a duty of loyalty to shareholder, all of them, without preference. If you can prove preferential treatment, you've got yourself a lawsuit.
2. Corporate Opportunity Doctrine....you cannot, if you're a director or officer of a company, "steal" a business opportunity that would otherwise accrue to the company. If you can prove such behavior, you've got yourself a lawsuit.
Then there's the issue of criminal matters. If the parent company wanted to increase their position in ACA they would obviously have information that the public didn't. Insider trading -- whoa, there's a nifty charge.Next, there's the complicity of current directors/officers in the intrigue, which would constitute manipulation.
Again, I just don't buy it -- too much risk for modest gain;the marketcap on ACA is already low; there's no reason to pull such a reckless exercise just to same a few million. Its not logical.
There are four stages to receiving bad news:
1. Denial
2. Blame
3. Acceptance
4. Dealing with it.
I don't believe there's any intrigue here. It was just bad news. The sooner we "deal with it," the sooner we can make sound investment decisions.
|
