The 4 year clause, wherever it is, is a non-issue to Elmer

He said as much

Without actually being able to see it, do we have a clue what it might mean

So they don't do whatever it is that the clause, whatever it says, that they must do

What then?

We are able to say "tag your it"

And then, after they have spent billions we say we have this real old line in an agreement between 6 or so of our predecessors that says if you don't finish, whatever that might mean, in 4 years we get it all?

Elmer knows that is a non-starter

We might have a cause for some damages, but that might even cost more than what we would get

That clause, when contemplated, has been overtaken by project developments, in any case

Some entity, concerned about being simply starved by lack of movement in dealing with a deep pocket company, like Teck, put that in an agrrement

Consider the actual road that Teck now has to achieve their interest

They would be committed to spending some 400 million before they would even have any earned interest in the property that CUU now owns

Nobody saw that back then

The 4 year is not the issue for Teck here, and Elmer is correctly interpreting that, IMO

..now 60 days to form the JV and produce the new contract is real