Settlement/purchase options, page-580

I've been slinking in the shadows a bit lately, but devouring everything there is to read on this forum, all the links, all the innuendo, and lately some nice fat facts to get my teeth into. Thank you Damo, Martenz, Mayfair, Tamra et al for your court appearances and updates, you make such a huge difference. Thank you Eshmun (who IS this poster?) for your inputs and well meaning warnings  which are obviously well informed despite your pleas about having no legal knowledge in this area of law (nice escape clause there).
Martenz, you mentioned above how "it is simply amazing the process 2 companies need to go through to determine if the termination is valid". So true, but for me it is simply amazing how we investors are supposed to be able to make informed decisions when so much information is kept behind closed doors. I mean we know nothing, have seen our monies whittled away to nothing and  may end up with nothing.
If the law provides a means for HQ to take everything from AGS then I have little doubt they will. What choices did (do) IG and our Board have but to fight? HQ have nothing to lose except pennies in the overall scale of things for them.
AGS is a high risk investment now but it wasn't always that way.  There should be a sentiment called "not for the faint of heart".
Guessing as always, like most posters on this forum, but imo HQ were always going to lose the sales rights to AGS' uranium. Their fight was about limiting damages.