Ann: Galan Response to AFR Street Talk Article, page-91

Half of you mugs should be ashamed of yourselves, imo.
Can’t you read the announcement?

It very clearly states:

“[Galan] has received an unsolicited, confidential, conditional, non-binding indicative proposal”

“Galan has been seeking to negotiate a confidentiality agreement with Energy in respect of the Proposal.  The confidentiality agreement currently sits with EnergyX.”

“The Proposal remains subject to consideration by Galan's board, and given the early stage nature of discussions and its conditionality, there is no certainty a transaction will eventuate.”


Take a deep breath and comprehend what this actually tells you, instead of venturing off into lala land.  

Afaict:

1/ Galan is seeking a confidentiality agreement prior to any potential discussion and/or negotiation regarding the indicative proposal.

2/ This is par for the course; it would be reckless to engage without protecting information about the company and its activities/plans/agreements/etc.

3/ The board has not yet (fully) considered the indicative proposal. There has seemingly been no subsequent material discussion or negotiation between the parties, as a confidentiality agreement is not yet in place. There is nothing stating what the company “thinks of” the indicative proposal, and any speculation that they will or might recommend the indicative proposal, with its current structure or anything even close to it, to shareholders, is unfounded.

4/ When approached by another entity with an indicative proposal, what is the appropriate course of action ….. “no, £€#% off, your indicative proposal is insulting” …or “thanks for your interest in our company, before we can engage in any related discussion, we’ll need to get a confidentiality agreement in place”…????
Making public statements about the absurdity or otherwise of an initial indicative proposal received from another entity, prior to any material discussion with said entity regarding that indicative proposal…. Not appropriate.  Simple.

5/ There is zero harm in engagement regarding this indicative proposal.  Who here actually believes that the company would accept/recommend the “offer” in the indicative proposal as it stands..? Seriously, who? Why?  It appears to me that the company doesn’t believe the current market cap reflects anywhere near the value of this company; a position that any holders surely agree with.  Getting “panicky” about what might happen, or whining because Galan haven’t publicly denounced the indicative proposal, just reeks of amateur hour.

6/ There’s an appropriate process; let it play out.  Discussion between the parties may lead to a revised “proposal”, and may help to emphasise the actual value of our resource.  Or it may lead to the “offer” remaining as it is, in which case I would expect the company to formally reject it…
A F T E R the parties engage and discuss it.

6/ People calling for pitchforks etc simply because the “offer” is (imo) pretty ordinary, and/or because the company hasn’t shot it down publicly PRIOR to any material engagement regarding it…. is imo disgraceful.


Sounds to me like a bunch or worn out, beaten down (understandable btw) holders (and some gleeful onlookers) wildly overreacting as they think the journey’s going to end with a sh!tty “buyout”.

Talk about jumping the gun and knee-jerk rallying of the troops.

WOW

Park your emotions and focus, as difficult as that is at times.


imo
Dyor


Ps. Those who disagree, please explain specifically where, how and why. Tia