$669 billion, page-24

myronc, no worries mate. My comment re the conciseness or general lack thereof of my own posts wasn't directed at you. I was actually thanking you for taking the time to read and dissect my gibba jabba. Sorry if it sounded like sarcasm. Wasn't intended to be.

You chaps have raised some interesting and very pertinent points in the subsequent dialogue. Some of these are key to forming a holistic picture of MSTs current state.

Firstly there have been a number of references to other potential investors, takeover suitors etc. Amongst these:

metoaswell said: "It was stated at the last meeting of the company that other parties are also looking at investing into MST. This has also been mentioned in their paper work over the last month or so. MST have also stated that the company wants & needs to restructure it's debt & finances.
We may end up with not just ASOF, but another 1 or 2 companies investing, which changes the dynamics of discussion."

schiffhead said: "Management cannot say anything. But they are confident at meetings and always saying 'other investors'. It seems likely 1 or 2 of the majors have looked at MST over the last 12 months"


It is truly hard to know where to start to address these issues. I do understand where you guys are coming from and these ideas have had merit in the past. MSTs situation is far from static however and one needs to ask themselves if old assumptions are still valid. I don't have definitive evidence that Santa isn't real but I can offer some evidence for your consideration so that you can decide for yourselves about the current and future validity of traditional assumptions.

Firstly, lets tackle the issue of a takeover by one of the majors, or anybody for that matter. For a takeover to succeed the bidder must believe that they can gain control of the company by acquiring more than 50% of the target companies stock, or rights thereto. The secondary objective is almost always to then gain in excess of 90% acceptance and compulsorily acquire any dissenters.

Up until now a takeover has seemed to be a genuine possibility as MST is a sitting duck as far as targets go. Lots of motivated sellers, share price in downward spiral, outlook almost completely obscured by lack of funding and debt overhang, no clear timeline for revenue, and assets that could be leveraged by a number potential suitors. Targets don't appear to get much easier so if one of the big boys was interested it wouldn't even be a challenge for them, well until now anyway.

But while there has been little standing in the way of somebody launching a traditional takeover offer, that has, or is changing as we speak. Recent developments are set to give a single party the rights to majority control of the company. Not just a blocking stake, but a stake so large that nobody else can or would even consider making an offer without dealing almost exclusively with them first. Dreams of a mystery bidder appear to take a beating the moment this notes change is approved.

With the majority of MST about to be handed to ASOF one wonders who else would consider investing and on what terms. It’s often hard to attract large investors into a company where one shareholder has majority control. Add to this the fact that any interested party could have already acted and picked up a decent stake dirt cheap.

I don't know what other investors management think are interested. Like you I hope they have some good ones up their sleeves. Other than our Singapore friend providing life support funding on numerous occasions, genuine investors who have followed through on the promises as announced to shareholders seem virtually nonexistent.

The picture is a somewhat complex one particularly because our hopes and dreams help to obscure what might have been going on around us. Given my overly simplistic explanation of the takeover objectives, one might conclude that MST has already been taken over with shareholders due to vote to hand over control shortly. The formal offer hasn't been described as a takeover and the bidder hasn't offered holders much at all but if you consider the outcome, what exactly will the difference be ? Remember that the bidder only needs the rights to the majority of the stock rather than the stock itself.

I have raised the question as to who exactly is behind ASOF, not the operator Spring Tree but rather the secret investors. Is it possible that ASOF was created at the request of a US based manufacturer or affiliates thereof ? Rather than ask why we haven't seen a takeover bid from a US based weapons manufacturer, maybe we should be asking exactly who is behind ASOF and thus who is about to control the majority of MST. Could the two be one and the same ?

Is MST in the process of being packaged by a group for sale or has it already been sold and we just aren't aware of who the buyer really is ?

The snippets of information coming from management would appear to be less fulfilling than the morsels fed to Oliver Twist and his mates. The details of the deal have been vague, the details for the dispute have been vague and to be honest I'm not sure they have even told us who will actually be in control of MST once the deal is finally implemented or the repercussions of this. While I want to believe in Santa, I have a sneaking suspicion of the masked dude trying to shimmy down our chimney late at night.

Sorry to dump all of this on you guys. I don't have all the answers but I have a ship load of question.