I find it interesting what the management team of SLI/IGD deems to be material information for each company...and how it couldn't be more different.

S.

As a matter of interest to those who have not yet read these...

(Keeping in mind that disclosure of information either through official news release, marketing materials, websites, events, etc. all fall under the same basic disclosure policies.)

I thought it might be interesting for those who want to read through some relevant TSX-V disclosure policy documentation. You may find where the statement Molson quoted fits in...not to mention you may find some other things worth noting as far as disclosure and lack thereof historically in relationship to the TSX-V policies.

*caution, reading may cause anger*

S.

http://www.tmx.com/en/pdf/Appendix3B.pdf

http://www.tmx.com/en/pdf/Appendix3C.pdf

http://www.tmx.com/en/pdf/Appendix3D.pdf

http://www.tmx.com/en/pdf/Appendix3E.pdf

http://www.tmx.com/en/pdf/Appendix3F.pdf

Sculpin,

One thing must be said, to ensure people don't take the article you linked to as anything but satirical.

It should be noted that the article is a satirical segment of the New Yorker. As sarcasm doesn't always come across clearly in print, I just wanted to make sure nobody took the article as reality.

S.

P.S Anyone who likes satrical news I would highly recommend http://www.theonion.com/ for a good laugh

You are assuming something that happens commonly in the industry is legal according to disclosure policies and law on sole the basis that it is common. Context is irrelevant, the laws as they are written are strict so that it removes interpretation of comments as fact by unsophisticated shareholders. If something isn't enforced due to lack of will by the authorities or lack of resources to do so...does not make it legal.

It is common for people to drive 10km above the speed limit but it is rarely, if ever enforced...that does not mean speeding 10 km over the speed limit is legal nor does it mean that if you kill someone while driving 10 km over the speed limit that it won't be taken into account when the law presses its charges and the prosecuter builds its case.

I certainly hope any defense should come to that be predicated on "well the rest of the industry does it, so I did" arguement.

S.

"Stewie - you always like to bold and respond. Please bold and respond to this: "I don't think sculpin's assessment of billions of dollars for a claim is even remotely realistic, and being that it would be based on potential value of the property, and the suit would remain 'open' until the value is determined, it is an entirely crazy proposition" Please Stewie...defend your leader's proposition."

First off, while it may be true in your world and you may simply be a follower of others, I can assure you I am following nobody.

While I am not a class action lawyer, I would tend to agree with you. I don't believe that there would be any place for the "future" value to be incorporated in any class action.

I do however think there may be a place for the assets of SLI to be protected for the shareholders and the company...it wouldn't be the first time assets become frozen until judgement is passed.

I also believe Lori and management have absolutely nothing to worry about in terms of class action. No class action law firm would take on a case that does not have a defendant that could pay any settlement or judgement. So it would be the regulators, government and/or authorities that would be the target of any class action if it were to happen and the damages claimed would be incredibly high as it always is. That seems pretty obvious to me.

What I would be worried about if I were connected to SLI is blow back.

Rest assured if a firm takes on a class action case they think they have a VERY winnable case. The reason for this is that firms would have to expend enormous amount of resources and social capital to see a case like this to the end...and they only recoup those costs if they win a settlement or judgement.

If there is a class action...you can be sure that everyone and their dog will be named in the claim from Canadian Securities to RCMP to MP's to the SEC, no doubt members of SLI past and present and possibly even entities like Stockhouse and Agoracom regardless how irrelevant they are to any damages claimed...it is normal to cast a wide net in order catch the biggest fish. The little fish get scared and start to turn on the bigger fish and the big fish in turn try to eat the little fish before they do as the net tightens...it's a beautiful thing to watch predators being devoured by their brethren in a classic every shark for themselves...those with the greatest strength, power and leverage stand a chance to survive relatively unscathed...those who are the weakest...Darwin takes care of those.

Like I said management and the BOD really have nothing to worry about as you can't take blood from a stone only a fool would try, but the day a class action axe falls I would start to worry. Those defendants will start to try and cover their assets by trying to show that they in fact did their jobs and reacted appropriately to the shareholders concerns over the years...Lori and the BOD in particular would become the most obvious scapegoat to be dressed in orange.

What do think? Interested in defending your leader to the end?...My guess is you would be the first to turn...the smallest in a free for all are usually the first to realize they will be devoured if they don't.

S.