Ann: ANS: Proposed $100m Placement & Strategic Investment in Sund, page-237

Mmmmm I don't think it is obvious at all and it seems that some holders are fixated on the numbers ($58m & $400m & respective percentages, without questioning other parts of this) I notice you made no comment on any of the other issues I raised!
The point of being a bit circumspect about this type of thing is because people can easily start believing stuff that is not actually fact!!
I have no idea of the motives, plans or strength of WAPRC, but it seems logical to me that:-
1 - Either they have very significant backers who intend to develop both projects or
2 - It is an opportunistic investment and control event that they believe they can make money from by delivering the projects to someone else later on (perhaps) (Remember SDL has been scrambling for an investor to appease the Cam Gov.)
3 - Or of course it could all be a ruse, however that doesn't seem likely and anyway ASX has ensured that can't happen. (Obviously the involvement of ANS creates doubts due to past history)
As I said, it is rather perplexing that a new company (conveniently with a name suggesting they build port/rails, which clearly they do not) has committed to investing and taking control of 2 problem child projects on 2 different continents
The structure doesn't make sense and it will be interesting to see how this proposal stacks up with the regulators (besides the money)!?
BTW - you are correct, if this falls over you can go back to original plan of noteholders converting at a discount to clear debt, however you would still need to raise funds. The noteholders appear to have no further appetite for investment in SDL.
I am not trying to down play SDL prospects, just trying to discuss what has been presented.
Hopefully for holders the scenario is option 1 above...............