Sorry to go off topic to a degree but i was wondering about your thoughts on the selection of Timeone. The MOU was signed with the Japanese but didnt proceed and Timeone was selected. Now the reason it didnt proceed with the Japanese was due to the inability to beneficiate? Surely management would have known that prior to signing the MOU and may be it was possible when the Japanese saw the PFS data they lost interest given the potential CAPE outlay?
I guess where i am heading is that the deal with Timeone felt very much like we had no other option. At the time when it was agreed they were given 30% of the company at a discount - the independent valuation said is was not fair but reasonable - again shows the deal was in the favour of Timeone. They have now missed the main payment for this deal and it doesnt seem like any pressure has been exerted for the funds. So i am thinking Timeone was the only option based on the deal and if we had a heap of other parties that leverage would have resulted in a better deal originally? Further to that these guys would be waiting in the wings so if Timeone didnt stick the plan as they havent then management could go to other suitors - this also isnt happening. So it might just be we need Timeone as opposed to the other way around and therefore management couldnt be too picky about who the people are more what they could offer?
PLV Price at posting:
20.3¢ Sentiment: None Disclosure: Held
