"  I just think at this point with 2 months not exactly my definition of "timely""

Well, old timer, why not give us your definition of "timely".

 

A real bummer when the memory goes, innit, BX (of course, the Geritol/crack cocaine combination likely doesn't help, right)?

Here's a refresher (bookmark it, BX, bookmark it).

On April 4, 2013, the company released that on March 22, 2013 (a Friday!!), the compant submitted its report to the BCSC. On April 4 (a Thursday), the company received a comment letter from BCSC. Taking out the weekends (two of them), the BCSC replied within seven working days.

Back to the drawing board went BGM and, according to a May 5, 2013, news release, on May 2, 2013 (a Thursday!!), BGM summitted its well-travelled report to the BCSC again. Taking out the weekends (four of them), it took BGM 22 working days to respond to the BCSC's April 4-received letter.

On May 9, 2013, the BCSC issued another comment letter. Taking out the weekend (one of them), it took the BCSC five working days to respond to BGM's report (which took the company 22 days to prepare).

Even you, BX, Geritol and crack-cocaine addled as you seem to be, must agree that the BCSC's responses are much more timely than BGM's.

And, lest you forget, wasn't it J Frank Callaghan who stated, on April 16, 2013, at the AGM, that the CTO would be lifted and the company's shares would be trading "next week".

How in heck could a commenmt like that be made? Surely, on April 16, 2013, the president and CEO knew about the April 4, 2013, comment letter from the BCSC?

Surely, on April 16, 2013, the president and CEO knew that the company's response to the April 4, 2013, comment letter from the BCSC hadn't been submitted, so that there was no way that the CTO could be lifted and the shares be trading "next week"...unless, in a giddy moment caused by the vote results, the OTCBB and TSX.V/FRA exchanges were jumbled together?