global times, page-10

Pandev, well it's really out of our hands (apart from the power that we can exercise via the vote - in my case a NO to 45 cents).

You're right about the scare mongering on the thread. It's pathetic and badly disguised. I have never come across a thread where "Holders with No Sentiments" mount a sustained down ramping campaign to rubbish their own investments. LOL !

IMO, if there is a counter-bid, then the outcome is almost certain to be in the mid 50's even in the worse case as any counter bidder will forgo any tit-for-tat baby steps counter-bids and pay a premium to SECURE this strategic resources.

In the overall scheme of things, whether it's 70/cents and share or 55/cents a share, it really marginal to the overall cost.

The reason why we only had 57 cents shares in the first case was because it was a CHINA-ONLY deal at the time. (Remember that was before the 50% increase in HIGH-GRADE resource definitition in Cameroon which the NDRC conveniently ignored), let alone the Congo resource upgrade just coming in.

ANy counter bidder would be highly cognizant that the Sundance footprint in the West African IO province is HIGHLY PROSPECTIVE and that as GK once said what hs been discovered is really the tip of the iceberg.