90 cents a floor price, page-8

Mattocks,

The information below is kindly provided by a member of the ESGSAG on ASIC's role in a SoA:


ASIC document that deals with SoA

See
http://www.asic.gov.au/asic/pdflib.nsf/LookupByFileName/rg60.pdf/$file/rg60.pdf

On page 5 they describe ASIC's role

Our role is to assist the court by:
(a) reviewing the content of scheme documents;
(b) reviewing the nature and function of the scheme;
(c) representing the interests of investors and creditors (where in many cases we may be the only party before the court other than the applicant);
(d) helping to ensure that all matters that are relevant to the court’s decision are properly brought to the court’s attention before it orders meetings or before it confirms a scheme; and
(e) registering scheme documents

On page 7 they state

RG 60.18 Shareholders should, however, receive equivalent (although not necessarily identical) treatment and protection, whether an acquisition is made under a scheme of arrangement or by any other type of acquisition (including capital reductions). As long as these protections are equivalent in nature, we do not favour one legal method over another.



Now if we examine the word "equivalent" we see a stark difference:


We have been given speculative risk attached to the SANTOS share price (whether the SANTOS share price goes up or down is irrelevant to the point) whereas TRU have been given certainty.


Santos, take that in your pipe and smoke it!! NOW, do the right thing and offer us what you have offered TRU as an alternative option to SANTOS scrip...

Cheers,