Good to see we are back to debating things sensibly. As I see...

Good to see we are back to debating things sensibly. As I see it:

(1) The 2020 Shareholding Wasn’t a Breach. The 2020 shareholding change (Billis’ control) was public, registeredand ully visible to Rimfire at the start of the earn-in. If that was a termination trigger, Rimfire could have — and would have — acted then. It didn’t, because it wasn’t a breach.

(2) The 2022 Event Was the Breach. What triggered the termination was the 2022 concealed governance power grab - Giovinazzo’s improper share issue, the undisclosed board stacking, the Court confirmed it was oppressive and invalid. This was exactly the kind of hidden change of control the contract guarded against.

(3) The 2020 Termination Argument Is a Smokescreen. A known shareholder (like Billis) holding shares wasn’t prohibited. The contract targeted undisclosed, improper changes of control — like what happened in 2022.Saying Rimfire should have terminated in 2020 is just a distraction from GPR’s internal collapse.

But this is all ultimately academic as I keep saying, lets leave it to the arbitrator now. There must be documents etc we cannot see and know nothing about. If, however, tendentious, obviously wrong or mischievious intent in posting information here, I will respond to it.