Re: 51-102 [NI] Continuous Disclosure Obligations
in response to
by
posted on
Jun 13, 2013 02:02PM
CUU own 25% Schaft Creek: proven/probable min. reserves/940.8m tonnes = 0.27% copper, 0.19 g/t gold, 0.018% moly and 1.72 g/t silver containing: 5.6b lbs copper, 5.8m ounces gold, 363.5m lbs moly and 51.7m ounces silver; (Recoverable CuEq 0.46%)
bunter - I don't see how answering these questions would remotely affect negotiations or breach a confidentiality agreement. These questions are in response to timelines outlined in the Salazar Option Agreement. These are public information that most of us based our DD on. Information that potential investors and present, are looking at to decide whether to buy or sell.
Yes, maybe we'll wait 11 more days giving the extension of 21 days (3 weeks) before demanding answers from CUU.
1) NR pertaining to the delivery of Feasibility Notice and addressing the official 120 day clock;
If CUU had done a NR on this issue, we wouldn't have posters to this date questionning the start of the 120 day clock. Should not affect negotiations at all.
2) NR addressing the issue as to why Liard shares were not transferred upon delivery of BFS/PFS;
If CUU had done a NR on this issue, we wouldn't have posters to this date questionning where is our Liard shares? Did we not earn it? Why note? Feasibility Notice not provided to Teck? Addressing this issue should not affect negotiations at all.
3) NR at 30 days to confirm acceptance by Teck of the BFS/PFS, that all requirements have been met to their satisfaction;
If CUU had done a NR on this issue, we wouldn't have posters to this date questionning the start of the 120 day clock. Should not affect negotiations at all.
4) NR at 60 days to address JV issue and why it has not been delivered to CUU for review;
If CUU had done a NR on this issue, we wouldn't have posters to this date questionning the start of the 120 day clock and the validity of the Option Agreement. Should not affect negotiations at all.
5) NR at 120 days regarding extension of time, providing a tentative end date and reasons for delay;
CUU's NR did not provide an end date to the extension of time, which leaves us wondering how much time is the extension for, weeks, months, years? An open ended agreement causes us to question the validity of the Option Agreement. Providing a tentative end date should not affect negotiations at all.
6) NR addressing expiration date of 120 days undeer Option Agreement i.e., CUU gets 100% of Schaft Creek; if not, why? If reason is because such knowledge would affect negotiations, then did they file reason for non-disclosure with the Securities Commission? This needs to be done every 10 days till NR.
I can understand not addressing this issue, provided they did timely file the reason for non-disclosure with the Securities Commission. I'm hoping that the inconvenience of having to file every 10 days would entice them to hurry up with the decision.