say yes to all, page-9

This is not about voting "no" or "yes" to the takeover- it's about voting as to whether Directors should get a pay rise. One of the factors in a vote like that would have to be, "Could the Directors have done better wit this takeover offer?" Some Directors, for example, would have responded to the offer with, "The Directors believe the offer materially undervalues the assets and is opportunistic, being made when the markets are in decline. The Directors recommend that shareholders TAKE NO ACTION." How often have we seen those recommendations? Often! It puts a company into play, it gives a dignified response, and on that kind of response, the SP would have probably gone up another 10%-20%, as the market would put the company into "play" mode, and await further action.

Here's the thing: had the company rejected the offer, and no other offer was made, the SP would fall to about .013, which is where it was before the offer, and where it is now! With most other takeovers, I get a feeling of having missed the boat, and having missed the premium. Chances are, if I put a bid on of .013c, I will get hit. What does this say? The market says then, that it is a rotten takeover.

Ligo is @ 87c and steady (as ever):

http://www.bloomberg.com/quote/LIGO:SP

Strangest takeover ever (well, close- CRE was bad, but we got a white knight to save us).

Why do your Directors deserve a pay RISE? Roy, as to Matt Wood, he is a rich fella, and has fingers in multiple pies. Most shareholders are just average folks. It's why the Directorships have such a responsibility to just work harder and harder for a "best practice" outcome. I am oping they have tricks up their sleeves, and a better outcome will emerge, because really, why should I, as a latecomewr, and not even in yet, get as good an outcome as you lot, which isn't so good!