That is an extremely interesting scenario, Golfyeti, particularly your suspicion that the Feasibility Notice has been delayed in order to avoid triggering tax consequences from transferring Liard shares.Everyone wants to avoid Revenue Canada!And, there would also be other administrative consequences if Liard shares had to be transferred twice.

In your message, you attribute the following hypothetical statement to Don Lindsay in conversation with Elmer Stewart

"We fully intend to take out your 24%, even if we are forced to grant you "Go shop" orders in exchange for a "FROR" -- we'll match your highest bidder if we have to. WE want to be the ones to choose our partner even if we have to alone take 100% first.”

While I think Teck can say “Go shop” if there is no agreement on a takeout price, I do not think that Copper Fox has to give a First Right of Refusal. If Teck does not want to meet what CUU negotiators think is a proper price, why should Teck be given special treatment for the imputed 24%?If CUU gave such a FROR, it would make potential suitors reticent to get involved (look at Galore Creek).

For the 120 days that they have to make their decision, Teck already has special treatment. If Teck wants to be the ones that chooses their partner, then they should (1) take 100% first by offering a fair price for CUU, (2) arrange for their partner to buy CUU for a fair price or (3) compete with all potential suitors for CUU’s 24% minimum.

While I find it difficult to believe that CUU would not deliver a Feasibility Notice, I find it equally difficult to comprehend why clear notification of such an event has not been given. To me, Golfyeti’s explanation re the Liard consequences provides some explanation. Even if a Feasibility notice has been delivered, it may be wise to keep it quiet.