something to consider, page-14

with regard to any independent expert's report there are always limitations.


i found our independent expert's report interesting because it did not take into consideration what four mile was worth to the then majority holder of four mile.

perhaps there should have been two independent expert's report. one for quasar and another one for everyone else.

the "special value" notion was not a consideration in our independent expert's report.

"special value" takes synergies into consideration.

"special value" also takes into consideration reduction in competition but imo this aspect of "special value" should not have been a consideration (even for quasar) as the annualised amount of alliance four mile uranium production was a fraction of 1% of annual global uranium production and even lower with regard to annual global uranium consumption.

one interesting thing is that from memory quasar was in the federal court arguing that this fraction of 1% was very important re matters concerning the termination of the marketing and sales agreement from a competition perspective.

maybe we should have got quasar to put together our independent expert's report.