media coverage on nsw and csg, page-23

Hi Yaq

You may be right about what the overall strategy is, I don't know.

I tend to look at things a lot more simply, for example;

1.
If ESG goes for the current STO/ESG ratio PLUS a few extra 'nuts' as a 'sweetener' - we can dress that one up, put lipstick on it as well as a bit of make-up but the reality is that it is still a pig.

In this instance I think the only response can be that DB was right all along (gosh that hurts :) ) and STO had ESG in the 'squirrel grip' and ESG caretakers have either been asleep at the wheel or were working with STO all along.

Any other explanation is very problematic IMO.

2.
If the ESG caretakers have been working with STO all along on this - they have been working to build up STO's business when they should have been building up our reserves and the capacity for ESG shareholders to benefit 100%.

3.
The gas is ours and the takeover price should reflect the value of our gas at the point of takeover - not some pie in the sky arrangement made with STO that may or may not happen.

If we have to wait for 2015 for our investment to mature with STO - I would rather vote NO - get rid of management and get a team in that can maximise value for us as shareholders and not receive a cut of a pie. I will wait till 2015 for that.

A cow pat can be packaged in nice wrapping and a big ribbon on top and they can tell me that it is cake - no problem - they can eat it - I know what it is.

If the offer price does not reflect the value of our gas - I will vote NO (3 times :) ). Anything else is just 'cake' which I ain't stupid enough to eat.

ESG caretakers won't get off the hook this easy.

All the best to you and, as always look forward to reading your posts.

best regards