Ann: Change in substantial holding from MIN, page-73

You are right. It is not the Takeover Panel that opines on fair value if a company is to be delisted. It is an academic point however, since we surely have too many shareholders to be delisted.

Changing the subject, the following is relevant to compulsory acquisition of our NWE shares..

https://download.asic.gov.au/media/5705444/rg10-published-21-june-2013-20200727.pdf

See page 24.

Because general compulsory acquisition applies whether or not a takeover bid has been made, the procedure to be followed includes additiona lprotections for minority shareholders:

(a) the 90% holder must have a ‘full beneficial interest’ rather than a relevant interest to meet the 90% threshold (s664A);

(b) the 90% holder must offer a cash sum (s664B);

(c) the 90% holder must provide an independent expert report addressing whether the consideration is fair value with its compulsory acquisition notice and (to the extent not covered by the expert report) include disclosure of any other information material to deciding whether to object to the acquisition (s664C(1)); and

(d) if holders of 10% or more of the securities covered by the notice object to the compulsory acquisition, the 90% holder must apply to the court for approval of the acquisition, and bear the cost of court proceedings, if it wishes to proceed with the compulsory acquisition (s664F).

So ASIC would require MIN to give us cash not scrip, and that after an independent expert (appointed by ASIC, it says later in the document) has determined fair value.

Come on the drilling, and hope that it provides the extra value for the expert to see - in the unlikely event of MIN acquiring 90%.

I don't understand clause (d). How could more than 10% object to the compulsory acquisition if MIN holds 90%?