NCC theories?
Northwynd CC: what theories are you talking about that are being recycled here? As you stated, much of the information being shared and connected is a matter of public record, and there are no theories. It is not a theory what was specifically stated with the debt, the conversion, loans, failure to follow through with the accepted plan, the decay of the Fairmont properties, negligence and mismanagement. I don't know how many times you have blamed all these troubles on mismanagement; and it wasn't limited to FRPL. You admitted to mismanagement in Dec. 2012, and you were the one who stated that it took you two years to reel the mess in and to come up with the reno project.
All the statements made about securities, swaps, exempt plans, how transactions are made, the security commissions and IIROC regulations etc. These are facts, not theories. Is it a theory that the financial status of the Fairmont properties is dire? Is it a theory that the securities of the trust are not secured on these properties? It it a theory that trustees can recommend and sell units? Is it a theory that law suits occurred and/or the plaintiffs reconciled once the threat of such existed? Is it a theory that some employees/staff/management of your organization have investments into the trust? Is it a theory that your CEO and first CFO who were heralded as the ones to lead Northwynd to financial viability are no longer there? Is it a theory that your current CEO was responsible for financial operations for virtually the past four years (or perhaps if he relegated such to someone else when he became CEO on one was told about it?
Here is a few of your theories: Justice Romaine originally approved all the structural, financial changes you have made since 2010. Justice Loo addressed the specifics related to all the changes made since the Queens Bench ruling and approved them; and she addressed the concept of fairness, representation and equal distribution of power inherent within the contract, and specific breaches and their potential ramifications; particularly as they relate to the best interests of the TS being bound. Justice Loo ruled that ignoring Justice Romaine's decisions regarding open and honest communication and a role in the decision-making process with respect to management of the properties was appropriate; and in accord with the principles of fairness being sought with the Queens Bench ruling.
You perhaps are referring to potential theorizing regarding who was engaging in fraudulent transactions outside of the one trustee appointed during transition, when your former CEO moved in from ashes of Fairmont, and together with your current CEO who had moved in 7 months later, combined to create even further financial and property decay. Oh sorry, that latter part wasn't a theory.
Principles of business management, securities transactions and the rules and regulations that govern such are not theories. Why don't you check with JustFacts, or are you one in the same, sort of like Fairmont and Northwynd.
Northwynd CC: what theories are you talking about that are being recycled here? As you stated, much of the information being shared and connected is a matter of public record, and there are no theories. It is not a theory what was specifically stated with the debt, the conversion, loans, failure to follow through with the accepted plan, the decay of the Fairmont properties, negligence and mismanagement. I don't know how many times you have blamed all these troubles on mismanagement; and it wasn't limited to FRPL. You admitted to mismanagement in Dec. 2012, and you were the one who stated that it took you two years to reel the mess in and to come up with the reno project.
All the statements made about securities, swaps, exempt plans, how transactions are made, the security commissions and IIROC regulations etc. These are facts, not theories. Is it a theory that the financial status of the Fairmont properties is dire? Is it a theory that the securities of the trust are not secured on these properties? It it a theory that trustees can recommend and sell units? Is it a theory that law suits occurred and/or the plaintiffs reconciled once the threat of such existed? Is it a theory that some employees/staff/management of your organization have investments into the trust? Is it a theory that your CEO and first CFO who were heralded as the ones to lead Northwynd to financial viability are no longer there? Is it a theory that your current CEO was responsible for financial operations for virtually the past four years (or perhaps if he relegated such to someone else when he became CEO on one was told about it?
Here is a few of your theories: Justice Romaine originally approved all the structural, financial changes you have made since 2010. Justice Loo addressed the specifics related to all the changes made since the Queens Bench ruling and approved them; and she addressed the concept of fairness, representation and equal distribution of power inherent within the contract, and specific breaches and their potential ramifications; particularly as they relate to the best interests of the TS being bound. Justice Loo ruled that ignoring Justice Romaine's decisions regarding open and honest communication and a role in the decision-making process with respect to management of the properties was appropriate; and in accord with the principles of fairness being sought with the Queens Bench ruling.
You perhaps are referring to potential theorizing regarding who was engaging in fraudulent transactions outside of the one trustee appointed during transition, when your former CEO moved in from ashes of Fairmont, and together with your current CEO who had moved in 7 months later, combined to create even further financial and property decay. Oh sorry, that latter part wasn't a theory.
Principles of business management, securities transactions and the rules and regulations that govern such are not theories. Why don't you check with JustFacts, or are you one in the same, sort of like Fairmont and Northwynd.