Okay, can it happen? sure I guess, but lots of logic to say otherwise IMO of course. Just some points to get the ball rolling:

1. Telus -- they seem to be a huge deterent to any funny business as they have the will and $$$ for legal pursuits. Maybe Rogers owns some shares too, just not as many. Judging by the amount of legal lizards at the SGM, there are many more that will also have a say in a court of law about any funny business.

2. I was going to say why bother with the whole sales arrangement, just back door it, but then I realized that courts need to okay transfer of spectrum because BCE. Then I thought, why not just settle with BCE -- pay them the $6 million or whatever (I assume that this is small potatoes to whomever is going to benefit from the "back-dooring") and then voila, free from BCE stranglehold and then back door away.

3. I would think that the regulatory bodies (securities ones, not IC) will be watching these guys with interest as there is a cloudy past and they (the regulators) seem to have been growing some balls as of late with regards to lowly shareholders rights (ie. the Hudbay/Lundin deal).

4. Same as above, but now the feds (IC) might have something to say about it also.

5. The sales process winning bid is voted on by the BOD -- Look's not UBS's. 3 of the 5 including the Chairman of the board are not on UBS's so there has to be something in it for them too. We're talking alot of $$$ promised down the line as they have alot of shares which they could just cash out in Look with a fair outcome now. My thoughts here are kind of like when you fly on a plane -- the pilot wants to get to the destination just as much as you do in a safe and timely fashion. Gerry even makes a point of discussing there fiduciary responsibility in his discussion at the meeting -- if anybody disputes this I fill find it for you.

6. Human nature -- it's greedy and wants the sure thing. Any back-dooring is going to make the UBS and LOK shares worthless. We're talking alot of shares held by insiders here who stand to lose or should I say give up alot. Any funny business is going to require some sort of new share structure (division of the pie) between the "back-dooring" parties in the new venture. Will the powers at be (ie. Alex, Gerry) have any more control in a new entity than they do now -- it's hard to see how as someone else is going to have to put up a significant amount of coin to do anything with the assets. In short there will be even more mouths at the trough, especially since there has to be something in it for the BOD to vote for something that's not lucrative to current shareholders as they themselves own lots of shares of current Look.

------------------------------------...

And then there's the trading -- it's the only tangible thing that we have as a retailer which is a fact. As of right now it's not sending out "red flags" indicative of the back -door scenario so I'm willing to gamble that we will see price appreciation from these levels (haven't a clue about how much appreciation -- don't have a crystal ball just like nobody else does). My thesis on the trading up to this point is based on primarily two things:

1. accumulation at the "bottom" is very controlled with light volume and tight control of the price action (stock actually made to appear dormant). As I've stated anonymous is on the buy side. Also alot of the "inside / sophisticated money" was getting in even before the sales process was announced -- remember how suspect the trades were down between 10 - 20 cents and how the level II would change on a dime. Somebody was buying through Blackmont heavily (in the hundreds of thousands of shares). 30 days to go is alot of time to scoop some more shares at these levels. More accumulation (the most) will occur when the stock finally breaks out (closer to the deadline) with volume, price will become much more violent as well as short selling comes into play as the stock see-saws violently. This is when I will begin to get more nervous because depending on the news to come (whether back door or front door, LOL), distribution might not be too far behind.

2. higher volumes with violent price action is required for any meaningful distribution of shares by any hypothetical "inside crooks" who know that their shares are going to be "out of the money". I am not seeing this, but this is not to say that we won't -- I would think it would be at higher prices than here though considering the lack of volume here at present levels.

Again, the fact that I am double my costs at current prices, and I haven't mortgaged the farm in the event of "funny business", are of great comfort.
Also, an aside to the "sophisticated money" discussion -- institutional money has been it hard in the last few months and is very risk adverse. This is still viewed as an extremely risky investment despite the immense value of the assets in question. Because this sales process has precise timelines, and there is no way of predicting an outcome before all bids are reviewed, the stock price may languish until such time that a leak ensues telling of a sale or joint venture with a reputable firm possibly 1 of the big 3 (this would probably occur before it was even voted on by the BOD so we would be in the dark). If this were the case the sophisticated money would fall all over this thing despite the past dealings of some of the insiders. If indeed the assets are back doored -- an immensely difficult endeavour IMO given the above thoughts the stock should give us time to get out in the next few weeks. My hopes are as high as the next guy's, but I am going to heed a fair amount of reason and caution, and hopefully take advantage of some trading opportunities to get some money off the table.