Ann: General Meeting Resolutions - Update , page-10

cattledog101,

IMO, A public perception of indecisiveness runs the risk of tarnishing more than pledges, no matter when they were perceived to be pledged. I would say Jan was the latest negotiations could have been speculated and October would be the earliest. therefore,,, either date,,,, long time between professional concordance.

Keep in mind there has been a board 'how to vote' footnote, that has been changed.

Keep in mind there is now also a form of warning out with regards to the obligations the company has regarding resolution 5

To my way of thinking,,, why did they need to clarify res 5, whilst not even relating res 3 or the rescinded res 2 ? )

On top of all this,,, there will be now be risk of a perceived probability regarding some form of compensability associated with resolution 2.

We will need to watch the 3b's closely post the eGM , as names will have to be published and signed off .

Will that then show the hand of a CSI not prepared to step from the shadows prior to a time comfort zone,,, that with some degree of likelyhood, may not be until DFT is understood ? And will that then force a premature takeover bid ?

Who guards the guard whilst the guard guards you ?

The more risk assessment that is understood,,, the lower the chance of surprise attacks in my experience

please dyodd this is an imho concept.



R D