Great question @allen1234 - and actually the 64 million dollar...

Great question @allen1234 - and actually the 64 million dollar question at this point in the juncture. Who's is actually more behind the curve with respect to resolving its conflicts with the ASX.

So forget about MTL for a moment as that suspension albeit somewhat similar , was handled very differently by the ASX from the outset. So my view is the ASX is almost seemingly ' learning on the fly ' if you like with this whole connectivity to Everblu and the related parties and individual companies.

However If you take one step back from it and go back to the time of the Cobalt Prospecting acquisition by VIC. Following the completion of this transaction which was again concluded through an amount of vended shares to the tune of a whopping 357,142,246 ordinary shares or an equivalent 29.1 % of the total shares on issue. Never mind the fact there was also Options as well as performance shares issued as part of this transactions. Yet given all of this , there was not one single substantial share notice lodged following completion of this transaction. So my guess is , and which is something I had been banging on about for some time was the obvious lack of escrow period pertaining to the vended shares which then resulted in the clear and systematic dumping of these securities into the market . Whether in hindsight or not , the ASX would not have been happy about this transaction for the same reasons that HDY admittedly confessed to the Corporations Law oversight in regards to the provisions of Effective Control ' and attached voting rights.

So my view is that VIC is in a whole lot more trouble than in fact HDY where the problem had been circumvented somewhat earlier in the process . However in both cases , the companies have exceeded their 12 monthly capital raising abilities be it the 15 % and / or the 10% rules. So at this stage , it is my view that the ASX is more than happy to allow the AGM's to progress and to see where the ' chips fall ' in regards to the re-election resolutions and/ or the capital expansion and raising resolutions.

In VIC's case , irrespective of the voting and which way it play's out - I would suggest that heads may roll regardless of the voting preferences and result in some voluntary resignations. With respect to HDY , it is a little more interesting in that : Yes there has been an oversight in regards to effective Control provisions and voting rights; and so this will be a key issues at our AGM. Will the sub notices votes be allowed and if so how will they vote. Whichever way it plays out , we should find out fairly soon as the Subs are presently holding a significant amount of voting influence on paper.

So in answer to your specific question , it would be my opinion that HDY if it plays the votes above board and prohibits the Sub's voting rights , then perhaps we could be up and trading sooner that say VIC. If on the other hand our BOD allows the votes, then we could be off to ASIC for further please explain's into the ' Effective Control ' issues.

Personally and notwithstanding all of this hoo-ha in regards to the ' he said - she said ' aspects of the suspension , I personally would like to know if they made the trip to Argentina in regards the newly acquired tenements and how in fact they progressed with that planned visitation. Because all this other stuff is simply a side show and should not matter one iota in how our company in pressing on with its daily business matters and progressing our mining tenements.......