Just sat down a few minutes ago, think this topic has stirred some new ideas and some reservations worth noting.

So far my inital reaction to what I am reading:

Opgrader- Your idea which rewards the Management based on the larger the settlement/award seems sound to me.

JJazz- I wish someone would ask Fung about the 10%, and about the last minute salary payout he got too.

Jack- Postponing could be a problem because the bridge money would be exhausted (in my estimation) before the 30-45 day extension.

JCW- I like your curt paragraph:

According to what has been disclosed of the current deal, Shareholder value will be significantly impacted, while company management and the lenders will benefit considerably at Shareholder expense.

I would add: The current deal should be accepted if the amending ithe plan's terms is not allowed or would cause the proposed financing process to be terminated.

Antirooski- A cap gives no incentive for a larger settlement?

Longkry / Stroot / Pockettnz: I understand your opinions and concerns about rocking the boat.

All in all I do not know how to proceed yet. A clearer picture of the situation might appear if we had an outside opinion. Someone who knows Canadian bussiness law could add an opinion of what can and can not happen at this April 5 hearing. Hopefully we can get the rest of the suits to weigh in on the topic.

GLTA-TIA-HB