I have not changed my view on what you call "morality". What I'm doing to offer you some glimmer of hope is saying that to prove an oppression claim (section 241 of the CBCA) "the way the company has betrayed shareholders" is critical. Gowling will need to prove that the company betrayed shareholders first. They will then need to show that there was a reasonable expectation for some other better treatment.

None of this is easy to do, especially when viewed against CCAA and court orders.

If I thought any different I would be an opt-in. My assessment is close to zero, it is only not zero because nothing ever is.

I can see you are angry, I'm not the person you should be angry at. I am trying to help by posting both the arithmetic and the legal aspects in response to direct questions. I don't see anyone else providing anything close to the transparency, comprehensiveness and honesty I have provided in answer to these questions.

I'd be happy to debate either of those aspects (the math and the legal arguments) but I don't think it is constructive to respond with specious and often insulting comments.