I only provided the reason for the delay given to shareholders by CUU staff when retail shareholders were calling the office in Sept to ask about when the meeting would be held.

No, someone gave their opinion that the reason for the delay was not apparent and you challenged that.

Yes, I did expect to be given a reason for the delay, or at least that it be apparent why the delay happened. Because of the delay more was expected out of the meeting. It seems obvious that if it is important to delay a meeting, then something different had to be available one month later than earlier.

What was that information? The NR does not appear to explain the importance of the delay, as someone else mentioned.