I'm thinking small bids all the way down to zero, increasing logarithmically. Total of nothing more than you can afford to lose.
"deals being done. Has to. Why would either party risk half a billion or more combined to watch us hit dirt?!"
.
State government takes almost a$100m per quarter. They're also a significant player who can tip in... not through capital injection, but through royalty relief. Overall a significant revenue stream to lose, all because they're taking more than their fair share.
.
$100m/quarter...
.
Perhaps it's EMG driving the price down to make the point to the state... "no one else is stepping in to buy, so it's time for you to step up and admit that you're taking more than your fair share"... and when the state steps in to change the severity of racketeering they're engaging in, that'll be when the share price goes up. I can't see the state letting their near a$100m per quarter revenue stream vaporise. Set bids accordingly.
.State = more than their fair share.
(20min delay)