Ann: Trading Halt, page-16

yr not going to get jumped on by anyone.. I have posted the details so many times..

please read carefully the entire contingent deed, not just the preamble, of which you have just quoted.

there is a clause and that clause states, very clearly, in writing that 'any alternative transaction.. that has the economic effect.. of a change of control'

forget about the preamble, forget about the 30% or any other sale relating exclusively to West Musgrave, or an interest there of.. The directors of CZI were not stupid, or their lawyers were not stupid when they included the clause re alternative transactions because they wanted to pay forward the potential that West Musgrave was worth way way more than the $76M they sold their 30% interest for..

Luckily for CPN, the wording of the deed does not limit their right simply to a transaction involving West Musgrave as a distinct asset, rather the deed includes the possibility that the entity controlling West Musgrave may be sold ( any alternative transaction ), in which case, the asset, WM, is part of that change of control and an approx value for WM can be attributed or at least determined.. even based on the NPV calculated by OZL WM is a monster asset and that's why either CZI, or their lawyers, were very clever in not limiting CPN's rights.

I am posting in the interests of CPN shareholders, not against them

There is a lot to play out in this space yet and my efforts to discuss it are in part a result of the Co's well intentioned and perhaps legally binding, silence on the matter. what we do know and I'm not speaking out of school as it is well known that CPN have their legal team across the matter and I have full confidence that they will do the right thing. The timing completely un predictable, as is the outcome.

as always DYOR