We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Gold/Mining/Energy : McEwen Mining -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JW@KSC who wrote (14041)12/21/2015 5:28:13 PM
From: labaguette  Respond to of 23818
nice answer jw .as to be listed on the Nyse is the core strategy for rob , i think he is able to propel the stock the very last days if necessary ; 7 days to wait .

To: JW@KSC who wrote (14041)12/21/2015 7:46:52 PM
From: Erie  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 23818
JW or others,

Some of the posts imply that this month (Dec.) is more important the other months in terms of the rules for being listed. I'm not challenging that interpretation, I'm only asking for an explanation in order to understand our situation better. I get the rule about being warned after the 30 day average drops before $1, but is there a provision for getting 'off probation' (or whatever term I should be using) if the most recent month has an average above $1? Even if there is, I don't see how MUX could pull that off in the last few days.
However, if there is such a rule, could January, or Feb. do the trick?
If Rob personally or the MUX buyback program is buying a lot recently, it might explain the unusually high volume on the Toronto exchange. Rather than following the NY lead, it almost seems lately that Toronto is leading the way higher. But it's hard to know, without some more digging, because of the fluctuating exchange factor.


To: JW@KSC who wrote (14041)12/22/2015 8:56:08 AM
From: Erie1 Recommendation

Recommended By

  Respond to of 23818
Thanks for all your work and the helpful reply to my question about the significance, if any, of the end of the year-end date in regards to potential delisting. I think I now know the answer and will state it for others who may have been as fuzzy on this as I was.
First, I should clarify my original puzzlement. I had read the earlier posting and posted rules, but then I saw posts that implied that somehow it was important for the MUX price to close this month (Dec.) at above $1 and with an average above $1. Since we were too far into the month to hope for a $1 average, I couldn't understand why one or more posters were paying special attention to the month or year end. I thought maybe I had missed something in the rules. And hopefully so!
But I had not, at least according to my reading of the rules. MUX needs to have a calendar month in which it both closes and averages over $1 over the previous 30 trading days. [USD of course; the trades on Toronto do count, but since they so closely track the exchange rate adjusted US listing price, the TSX price only figures in the volume].] The month of December is a lost cause re the consolidated average of course, so I'm hoping for that January will be our magic month in which we emerge successfully from the 'cure period'.
Note that the average is over the previous 30 trading days rather than the calendar month. That makes a big difference. The start of the 30 trading days period ending Friday Jan 29 is approximately Dec. 17 (I may not be getting the holiday close days correct). So we only have 2 or 3 days 'under $1.00 to counterbalance. I'm cautiously optimistic.
Here's the relevant rule, with my bold added to the key parts:
"The company can regain compliance at any time during the six-month cure period if on the last trading day of any calendar month during the cure period the company has a closing share price of at least $1.00 and an average closing share price of at least $1.00 over the 30 trading-day period ending on the last trading day of that month."

I agree with JW that the rules are written with a lot of wiggle room, and Rob has share consolidation as the 'cure' if needed. I don't think it will be.