07-03-2016, 08:50 PM
The problem with not using GCA and NSAI is they have a history before this last certification of evaluating E/A . According to a Pet Engin you learn as you do evaluations and one gets a more accurate evaluation with multiple certification attempts on an asset. Makes sense from at least a common sense view . The other 3 evaluators have zero knowledge of E/A so their first attempt it's said will historically be more conservative than a multi attempt effort .
Both OSH and Civelli are paying for this started now stopped appraisal which was almost complete . We as selling shareholders need to see an appraisal like this one through Ant 6 so we have a proper base line to see what Ant 7 really reveals and to help evaluate the OSH deal . When we hear about the new deal terms and name the asset size through Ant 6 helps shareholders evaluate that deal also . Without that number surely we are headed to litigation . The biggest question is why was the evaluation stopped and what are they hiding by stopping the evaluation and why did you waste the money for an evaluation if it supports your lower asset position ?.. The stop supports an arguement for fraud . Or expect litigation .
Thank you lil old lady for your add on info to your post .
Both OSH and Civelli are paying for this started now stopped appraisal which was almost complete . We as selling shareholders need to see an appraisal like this one through Ant 6 so we have a proper base line to see what Ant 7 really reveals and to help evaluate the OSH deal . When we hear about the new deal terms and name the asset size through Ant 6 helps shareholders evaluate that deal also . Without that number surely we are headed to litigation . The biggest question is why was the evaluation stopped and what are they hiding by stopping the evaluation and why did you waste the money for an evaluation if it supports your lower asset position ?.. The stop supports an arguement for fraud . Or expect litigation .
Thank you lil old lady for your add on info to your post .