There has been a lot of discussion about the possibility of an NDA between CUU and Teck

Problem is it is being used as an excuse for CUU to stop communicating with its shareholders, which is not what an NDA is

Here is what an NDA is:

A non-disclosure agreement (NDA), also known as a confidentiality agreement (CA), confidential disclosure agreement (CDA), proprietary information agreement (PIA), or secrecy agreement, is a legal contract between at least two parties that outlines confidential material, knowledge, or information that the parties wish to share with one another for certain purposes, but wish to restrict access to or by third parties. It is a contract through which the parties agree not to disclose information covered by the agreement. An NDA creates a confidential relationship between the parties to protect any type of confidential and proprietary information or trade secrets. As such, an NDA protects nonpublic business information.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-disclosure_agreement

I do not doubt that there is in fact an NDA between CUU and Teck which would cover the available material contained in the BFS and any other data CUU has relative to Schaft Creek

The fact that there is an NDA extant does not preclude managements advising stakeholders that such an agreement is in force

That is taking liberties with the law requiring disclosure to shareholders

There is not an NDA that covers the failure to disclose that an NDA exists

That is simply complicity in a smoke screen to keep the share prices down during negotiations and I for one don't think it is legal to hide the general fact of negotiations from shareholders