Well its been 2 months since I posted and was enjoying not having to correct Pauu. At this point it doesn't really matter what you post and how you misrepresent the court documents. For old time sake I thought I would show how you want to spin a positive into a negative. Fine said "I have been advised by Delna Contractor, a lawyer at Gowlings, that over 350 shareholders have contacted Gowlings seeking to opt-in. To date, 218 shareholders have successfully executed opt-in agreements to be represented by the Shareholders Committee."

Perhaps your law firm uses TO DATE differently. Here is a couple definitions for you "as yet, up to now, till now, until now, up to the present (time)

It does not say 132 decided not to opt in. It says "TO DATE" 218 have successfully opted in. Some may have not been verified yet, some may be missing documentation, some may be like you who was only interested in finding out what the committee had planned. It wouldn't surprise me if there were a bunch of bogus requests from Crystallex and Tenor trying to get information.

Your effort to show us that there are 131 people like you who are not optting in is speculation on your part. If Fine had said that of the 350 only 218 decided to sign up then you would be correct but as usual you can't say that so you twist the words to fit your motives.

Someone mentioned that to get 30% of shareholders signed up using word of mouth and bulliten boards is an acomplishment. It is actually amazing and shows how much shareholders care about their investment. Can you imagine if Crystallex didn't block the Ad Hoc committee from getting the shareholder list how many would be waiting to sign up. 

I know most of your fears about Gowlings are becoming reality Pauu. You use to say what have they done "NOTHING". Well you can see now what they have done and plan to do. I would imagine there are some nervous insiders right now.

One of my favourite parts of Fine's affidavit is on page 13 item 43 where at the bottom it says and I quote for you Paau "Mr. Oppenheimer subsequently made arrangements for me to speak with Crystallex board members on a conference call. In advance of that call, Mr. Oppenheimer told me that an offer would be made to pay me $3 – 4 million and that it was quite important that Tony Reyes, another Crystallex shareholder, be on the call."

Wow. I'm not sure what you or your law firm calls it but I know what I call it. Like the old saying if it walks like a duck, and quackes like a duck it is a duck.

When we look at page 2 item 4 of the affidavit Mr. Fine discloses the following and again I quote for you Paau "I have been a shareholder of Crystallex International Corporation (“Crystallex”) since 1999. At present I am the beneficial owner of 140,764 shares of Crystallex, and the managing member of three limited liability corporations that together hold over two million shares. All of these shares were acquired prior to 2010.

I'm not a very smart person Paau or I wouldn't have got duped by Fung but luckily I do know how to use a calculator. Lets say little Johnny or Paau or Jimmijazz has 2 million marbles and someone offers them $4 million dollars for all their marbles. How much is each marble worth? Can we say it slowly together $2.00 per marble.

I wonder why it was so important for Mr. Reyes to be on the call? Questions, questions, questions!!!!

Finally before I go back into hibernation there is one more fascinating statement on page 14 item 44 from Mr. Fine. "On or about, March, 2014, I participated in a call with Mr. Oppenheimer, Tony Reyes and David Kay, one of the DIP Lender’s two appointees to the Crystallex Board. I understand from statements made on that call that privilege may be asserted by the other participants with respect to the matters discussed on that call, and as such I am not disclosing the substance of what transpired. I am prepared to give evidence as to the contents of the discussion if the other participants do not object to me doing so.

Sounds like Mr. Fine is more than ready to explain what transpired on the call. I wonder is the others will say sure we have nothing to hide. If you could bet in vegas the odds of the other 3 allowing the informtion into public domain would be 0% IMO.

Spin away!