Hi Jim;

In answer to you question I have no idea why no halts occured when PAI wrote their letter and demanded a special meeting. They wanted Greg Noval to step down as Chairman of SNG due to a conflict of interest and he responded by resigning from the Board of Directors of Challenger Energy which is not what PAI desired. See the following documents:

http://idea.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/d...

I also cannot explain why there was not a halt called when the Court appointed the Receiver in SNG's present situation. I understand that a trading halt is called if important information is to be released which will have a material impact on the outcome of the share price. All I can think is that SNG management determined that both events would have no material impact on the share price as the share price had already dropped so low that it wouldn't go much lower. SNG management seems to be stonewalling all critics and maintaining their silence until the Receiver and Scotia/Waterous have done their jobs in my opinion.

Best Wishes; Scott