Good post. The Directors of all the (THREE) companies involved have to assess and react to the substance of what has happened. The 10% rule is a "deeming" provision regarding insidership. The relationship with KWG provided factual substantive access to something like 100% of the JV and related SPQ data. The last time I checked my mailbox, I do not have that depth of data about (mirrored) SPQ or KWG. Can I just go to KWG and ask for it ? Perhaps because I am curious about SPQ ? Personally, I think CLF is generally advantaged. Is that not why valuations are required in many circumstances ? It is simply about a level playing field. But as tiny fly-on-the-ass-of-Baystreet shareholders, we don't need to worry, the big KWG and SPQ shareholders will push it back to a level playing field if required. Quite possibly, the .19 or even the .13 was truly an aggrieved fit of generosity on CLF's part. Were it not for the bluster, it would have more credence. This dance is far from over, but CLF is somehow starting to look a bit like a jealous lover. That's OK too.

I am long CLF, and SPQ/KWG much lesser, so I really hope an orderly resolution ensues, but it needs to be fair to be orderly. I am an investor, not a cheerleader for a bunch of gladiators. Because the OSC suffers from early onset dimentia , we small holders continually get pushed off good investments too early. I am now hoping for a major selloff of KWG tomorrow, my truck is running and I've got it in reverse. It smells to me like some large KWG and SPQ holders will think likewise.