I think you should have emphasised 'institutional' rather than individual clients.
Ultimately they are here to make money, and they could well be acting on behalf of Macquarie or MIN themselves could they not?
No idea what this means for the TO, but as a face value signal i'm inclined to think it's an attempt at entrenching MINs take over bid rather than challenging it. But counterpoint to that is why the hell would they get someone like MM to proxy?
I think you should have emphasised 'institutional' rather than...
-
- There are more pages in this discussion • 17 more messages in this thread...
You’re viewing a single post only. To view the entire thread just sign in or Join Now (FREE)