If there is governance issues, then in NO way, should there be a C$8.5m penalty to defer 6 months to sort out. The vendors should say, "Oh crap, we understand, we will work with you"
All this time,,,,and only recently on 4 Dec, was the deal really well manicured to a 1m up front payment. They didnt know about it then ? If it is true, then they need to explain it.
Unless this C$8.5m can come off the C$52m principal, not Add to it, then this is Madness.
If we maintain, that it is a no brainer to acquire a C$1b plant for C$52m, for lithium 3.0, whenever that is. The acquisition adds to our book value, and advantage to a predator if he is selecting a company with a $260m capex or $1b capex path. So in that case, a deferral to the inevitable, is madness and is pure waste of $8.5m
I have never participated in a CR where the use of funds is the incinerate those funds immediately for nort gain. If there is governance issues with acquisition, it should not cost us a penny in deferral.
What is there next trick in 6 months ? to incinerate another 10m ? to deferral again ? Stop this BS now.
We need a transparent explanation, and management that is going to fight for our every dollar, not just wimp it over to the incinerator as a deferral penalty.
Full explanation CE, or we must should perhaps call an EGM. There is 23m cash presently, and we need to use 3m of it for PWM, and only 1m to action the renard deal ? If there is governance issues, then that should not change. A free deferral until it is a valid acquisition.
Surely you cant charge someone, an additional C$8.5m if there is an inherent violation of legal to move forward. Thats like charging a down payment, on a home you dont own. But pretend to sell it to the would be suitor.
A personalised tool to help users track selected stocks. Delivering real-time notifications on price updates, announcements, and performance stats on each to help make informed investment decisions.
(20min delay)