KRY originally notified VZ of a dispute under the BIT etc. etc. based on a permit refusal by the environment minister.

KRY seemingly tried, in a reasonable manner, to address the environmental concerns.

Still no permit, so they then tried to structure a deal with a politically acceptable partner.

With the contract now cancelled, VZ has clearly shown that they are not dealing in good faith, so I am thinking that the the Arb. claim now is on much stronger ground than if it had been filed 2 years ago. JMO

The one thing that really bothers me though, is that we never proposed a 50-50 JV of the type that VZ has repeatedly stated is their preference for resource exploitation. I know RM has said that they never asked KRY to modify the MOC but why not offer them what they have said publicly is their prefered formula. Seems very odd.

BTW, keep posting. Your venting is way more interesting and accurate than the never ending BS pumper posts and foolish arguing that used to fill the board before EZ was banned.