InvestorsHub Logo
Boards
News
Market Data
Markets
Discover
Discover
Subscribe Login/Register
S&P 500
5,460.48
(
-0.41%
)
US TECH 100
19,181.60
(
-0.43%
)
Dow Jones
39,118.86
(
-0.12%
)
Brent Oil
84.85
(
0.00%
)
Bitcoin
61,450.11
(
0.92%
)
Post# of 145346
Next 10
Reply Private New
Public Reply Private Reply New Post
Keep Last Read
Replies (1) Keep Next 10 Report Keyboard Shortcuts
Replies (1) Next 10 Prev Next

Koan

Send PM Follow Ignore
Followers 22
Posts 395
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 08/07/2018

Koan

Re: I-Glow post# 52997

Friday, 11/23/2018 11:23:23 AM

Friday, November 23, 2018 11:23:23 AM

Post# of 145346
This entire line of reasoning has been debunked multiple times.

This is a cross-border case underneath the CCAA (Companies' Creditors Arrangement Act) via Canadian courts as the primary case, with the ancillary case being a U.S. Chapter 15 (not U.S. Chapter 7 or 11).

Therefore, any conclusions derived from erroneous premises are fantasy.

It is Canadian laws that need to be cited to support conclusions. Those who think shares will be cancelled have cited zero laws from any country, let alone Canada.
Public Reply Private Reply New Post
Keep Last Read
Replies (1) Keep Last Read Next 10 Report Keyboard Shortcuts
Replies (1) Next 10 Prev Next

Join the InvestorsHub Community

Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.

Sign Up