Ann: SGH FY17 Results Presentation, page-196

dj

I'm leaning to a NO vote.
Just under 1.4 M votes.

Frankly I think that the lenders or associates may have been buying up big in recent months at low prices and will be able to swamp the vote.

But if all the little holders voted NO it would say something to the lenders and as you said the lenders might even make a better offer in the unlikely event that the NO vote succeeds.

Most of the longer term holders will have been squeezed to such a low level of return at 4% of one third of the enterprise that total capital loss won't be too different to what's on offer especially if the LT holders have capital gains to offset, and capital losses can be carried into other tax years in any case.

If it was 90% dilution I would rethink.

If it was 85% dilution I would definitely vote YES as the SP should be in the 20's and I'd accept the loss at that level.

The alternative is to push S&G into liquidation out of bloody mindedness which as you said would not be a great outcome for the lenders either.

But if they had any sense they would have already gone for a less draconian dilution and probably seen less loss of key staff and lowering of general morale as any idea of a hedge fund having a moral compass dwindled. It's no coincidence that the exodus accelerated after the dilution was announced.

Or holders can sell now, get a pittance and move on as it seems clear that as things stand they could be looking at an even larger loss.