Ann: UCL:1.Takeover bid for Minemakers 2.Converti, page-13

re: Ann: UCL:1.Takeover bid for Minemakers 2....
Well, well, well.

Sevo, from memory ted ellyard was part of bonaparte diamonds so associated with the acquisition of the tenements that MAK got with BON that have gone into the JV. Correct me folks if I am wrong. It will be very interesting to see how Ellyard responds to this - it will indicate whether the MAK camp is divided or not.

Rods, I'm not sure about the effective price UCL are offering but this offer does have some strengths for MAK holders that the MAK offer did not for UCL holders in reverse.:
- it has strong backing with the Omanis financing it and the shadow of JK in the background. This gives confidence about UCLs potential to get Sandpiper running. MAK, whilst having more cash, had no such strength for UCL holders and the never ending NMDC story was a weakness not a strength,
- as far as i can see there is no immediate dilutive effect for MAK holders in their exposure to Sandpiper - this was a definite problem for UCL holders the other way as most did not see Wonarah as compensation
- there is dilution in Wonarah ownership but MAK holders already are prepared for that in the unresolved NMDC proposal at 50%. MAK holders will want to weigh up the long term prospects of dilution when it comes to financing wonarah
- there is a cash component. This will be attractive to at least some MAK holders as they will get cash in pocket whilst still keeping exposure to all of MAKs assets plus acquire long term committed partners in the Omanis and Kahlbetzer who have already put their money into their commitment.

There is a rationale for merging provided both parties are satisfied. I think the UCL offer is closer to a win win than was the MAK offer. Allow that i am a UCL holder though and not MAK.