Jimmy - This process is fundamental to any dealing with a public company, even a complete buyout.
Two companies agree to pursue something. Then they sign a final deal. This must occur first because the next step is shareholders must vote to approve it. ONce that happens there is still a closing before it is complete. This is fundamental to dealing with public companies.
The point of my response was/remains that you should be careful calling someone a liar or making accusations of such if you don't undestand how legal agreements proceed with public companies or the content of the agreements.
Also, I never said management mislead us. I said that something changed and they should have informed us officially. When the PR was released announcing the binding agreement to pursue the JV it was made clear that the signing was to be done by 7/31/2010 and that the permit was not required until closing, after the shareholder vote. Today, we are told, though unofficially that everything is done but now they won't sign until the permit is in hand. This is a significant change from what was stated in June and I just want to know why.
Personally I agree with it and I thought it was foolish to not require it before signing. It is becausewe have not been informed that the market has major doubts this JV will occur and hence our share price is in the toilet. That is where I disagree with management. If they had kept us informed of what was going on our share price would be higher. They are asking us to remain invested on nothing but faith. Considering their history of not getting the permit and now passing their own 7/31 deadline, I think that is a bit much to ask.
I'll let this issue rest now. I just don't like the increasing attacks on anyone who has concerns and the accusations that they are liars or trying to spread falsehoods. Why would anyone who is long WANT the price to go down further? We don't, but we don't have to keep our concerns silent either.
