quarry deal flawed, sublease issues arise!

Quotes from the quarterly report: "To this end the Company commenced a due diligence program; however to-date this program remains incomplete due to the inability or lack of desire on behalf of the quarry owner to provide proper information in relation to this business."

So it appears the quarry owner never intended to sell the business in the first place. That, of course, didn't prevent CNQ from mumbling about purchasing it in several quarterly reports. Memo to Carbine: It takes two to make a deal.

"Carbine has also been unable to resolve a number of sublease condition issues with the quarry owner and mining leaseholder. Carbine has initiated a dispute conciliation process under its sublease with the quarry an mining leaseholder to attempt to resolve these matters."

Uh oh! Now the truth comes to light. There are "issues" with the sublease! Wait a minute, don't potential financiers do their DD on basics like this? Wouldn't it be reasonable to assume that these potential fianciers, in particular Mitsubishi, became aware of such "issues" during their DD process? Wouldn't it be further reasonable to assume that such issues might have played a role, if not the decisive role, in preventing Mitsubishi from issuing the funds needed to build the mine? If so, why hasn't this been reported?

Several questions must be asked. When did such "issues" arise for the first time? Did CNQ inform the market in a timely manner as required by the ASX? If it didn't, what are the potential consequences?