Replies to post #67131 on Copper King Mining Corporation fka CPRKQ

[Regulator78]

RDG,

I guess we will just have to agree to disagree then. From what I read in the initial filing the concern was that the intecreditor agreement was not signed because of PNs actions. For there to be damages they will have to prove that the agreement would have gone through if PN had not interfered. If they can't prove that there are no damages. It doesn't matter who they swayed or did not. Again, to be damages they are going to have to prove that the agreement would have gone through if PN were never in the picture. The damages are about the agreement not who PN swayed or didn't, they are about why the agreement was not signed and moNey not lent. They have a very tough case here.