I'm going to reply to this post and that's it for the time being...

I'm going to reply to this post and that's it for the time being because it seems the amateur standard it has reached is indicative of something not quite right, agenda-wise.

Conditional contracts, where the probability of legal action skyrockets as opposed to a contract with absolute clauses, especially in this case where parties separate from Canyon haven't formally finalized their dealings. No thanks and why would you take that chance with respect to Canyon's current position in the process.

Further on from that, in the 9th Aug 2018 permit grant announcement (same one as the timeline detailed) the company had already established and made it known that all relevant contracts will be included in the mining convention. The lines in the sand were drawn in mid-2018 and in the meantime, shareholders want the lines moved??

This speculation of a Chinese sinister grand plan is just that, speculation at best, in this case, no evidence to support it and still waiting for an explanation on how they will achieve control of the company without majority ownership of the registry.

$800USD million market cap by the end of 2019 talk I very much doubt came directly from the company. I know of one high profile investor talking it up in that area but never seen or heard the company specifically state anything like that.

... and most certainly will feed the corporate line that the process takes time and often surpasses planned deadlines. Although in this instance that cannot happen and very much doubt it will happen.

And experience or not. You'll never completely be in the know to be able to make absolute bold statements without intimately being involved with the due processes.