JC, I don't see it as siding with the bondies. You have stated that what they are entitled to and the reason their offer is of 15% isn't much different from Tenors.

Here is where we differ.

There absolutely is money on the table. $100 large. By proposing a Plan, the Bondies are extending their current unsecured loan, instead of stopping the CCAA process and scuttling the company.

They are only extending or being forced to extend because of CCAA the unsecured loan because they have to. Scuttling the company leaves the bondies with nothing because the only secured creditor is Tenor. The concept that the bondies are out $100 million and interest is a bit of smoke and mirrors as well. I don't have the facts but I seriously doubt many of the current bondies put up the $100 million. They have bought the debt at a reduced rate and gambled the same as share holders who have also invested unsecured money.

Do not be fooled into thinking that Crystallex is completely in charge of this CCAA. The court cannot force any Plan, only a vote by creditors can. It does not matter if the Notes are unsecured, the Notes are still debt and have rights of collection under CCAA. This proposed Noteholder Plan is basically a refinancing of the notes at 15% simple interest, plus 15% of the arbitration proceeds for the "opportunity." Anything more than 15% of arbitration proceeds give-away is all contingent of continued Crystallex delays.

The bondies are not entitled to anything more than what the contract states. The debt owing can only be collected by an award in arbitration or settlement. They have admitted this in court and if their plan was to be approved they would continue down the same path as Kry with the only difference being they would reap all the rewards and us unsecured investors would get ZERO.

For some reason, Crystallex does not want to deal with the Noteholders. Maybe the Noteholders have compromising pictures of Fung with animals, or whatever. Regardless, I do not believe it has anything to do with Crystallex protecting shareholder value. Who knows, maybe Tenor will step up and pay off Bondies for more of the arbitration proceeds because of this Bondie proposal. Why Tenor has not stepped up is unknown and somewhat suspicious. Anyway, Crystallex definitely does not want any vote on a Plan to happen, and knows Bondie fear and greed keeps this circus alive. When Crystallex runs out of money in the near future, who will be there? Tenor.

Crystallex has stated many times they have tried to reach an agreement with the bondies. The stumbling block was originally the noteholders wanted it all. This was even before going into CCAA protection. Don't portray them them as some poor investor that is stuck with bad debt and just want whats right. The majority of the bondies took a calculated gamble like we did when we invested. The difference is they gambled that Kry wouldn't be able to pay off the debt when it came due and by buying the debt they would be able to force Kry to give them their arbitration claim. To accomplish this they have used the courts to burn up Kry cash through a multitude of actions which they knew they would win. They then have the balls to complain that Kry will run out of money when the reason they may run out is because the bondies are forcing costly legal action. The bondies are playing a high stakes game where they believe the worst case will them getting their $100 million and interest because our case is so good.

Calling the Bondie proposal ludicrous or outrageous is justified. However, Tenor received 10% compounded (equals 15% simple after nine years) interest plus 35% of arbitration proceeds.

Agreedbut the Tenor deal was deemed the best not only by Kry but the Monitor as well as the judge. The bondies could have made the same offer but chose an offer that would cause Kry to come back to the table more often for more money and give the bondies who wanted it all more control. None of the deals were good for shareholders. Please remember that a deal with Tenor was in place that would have paid off the bondies before going into CCAA but was scuttled by the bondies because they wouldn't get any of the award that they weren't entitled to. GREED by the bondies has been and will remain their downfall.

If no one thinks this mess cannot continue on and on before collection of proceeds, well, this circus has been running on and on already. And, when Crystallex runs out of cash, what sort of terms for another loan "protecting shareholders" will Tenor provide based on the last loan.

I have no idea what type of loan will be needed but I'm betting my bottom dollar that it will be better for all share holders that anything the bondies propose as a back door of taking the whole award. The bondies can't continue to try and destroy current shareholders and then expect us to say he BUDDY!

As far as the "outrage" over Noteholders not paying the court costs as yet, Noteholders have not seen any interest payment on thier Notes since CCAA. So, what is so bad about them saying to put it on their tab and work it out later? Ok, understandable that Bondies are the bad guy here. But, c'mon. Bondies could file for CCAA protection and delay.

In theory saying put it against what you owe us is reasonable premise but this isn't a normal situation. We are in CCAA protection where there are rules and all debt owing is paid through court approval. This is exactly what I mean when I say the bondies aren't interested in getting what is owed them. They want it all and when a deal with Tenor was done the only way the bondies could win is by showing everyone that we will run out of money. To do that they have been making ludicrous offers to spend as much of our money as possible in court and legal fees. The bondies are playing the game of trying to look like you want a deal forcing our legal bills to run us out of money. The is the reason the bondies are not paying what has been ordered by the court.

I could go on and on but it won't make any difference.

JJ