Good Morning Boomer!Thank You for your most passionate and...

Good Morning Boomer!

Thank You for your most passionate and slightly aggressive response and for the opportunity to help you through this.....

Allow me to take you through, point by point.

>>Wow Cleo,
>>So Maple brown execs have $70000 approx ppx between them.
>>They are going to sell them in competition with their clients in the funds?
>>Their reps worth ba bit more than that.

No, you don't know how much "the exec's" have invested in this stock. All YOU know is how much is visible on the significant shareholders statement, in separate entities, for ONE employee, Mr Geoffrey Bazzan. The "exec's" may hold stock within other entities, within a fund or in a nominee. It would be normal practice for them to declare a holding within a nominee, but not essential.

There is one definite way to find out, ring them up and ask!

Unique concept, I know :-)

As for competing with their funds, there is no conflict here and there would be no "rep" damage if they bought or sold, at this point.

>>Oh please.

I love it when you beg ;-)


>>And the other effort,

>"If you read the statement, two of the nominees sold, National and Citicorp.
>MBA did not change their holding. If they are nominee holdings, MBA have no
>say. Incidentally, both nominee companies are Melbourne based."

>>You seriously believe that the nominee company determines whether a >>holding is sold.
>>Ever wondered why they are called "nominees"?

Now for this one I'm typing slowly, because I know you read slowly.

You are correct on one point, nominees rarely, if ever determine when a stock is to be sold. However, I doubt those two nominees act for MBA.

MBA are predominately a "manager of managers" rather than a Retail fund, hence their clients tend to be large funds. If I was a Gambler, I would guess at least one of those nominees is acting for REST Super, but that is totally speculative.

Don't forget, one of the big issues facing all fund managers at the moment is Redemptions. Have we seen MBA reduce holdings in other companies via the same nominees? There's an interesting project for you that could help you understand the current market dynamics better.

>>God I hope you are not a company troll, any hope for ppx is gone ,if that >>represents the standards of intellect that ppx management has at its >>disposal.

No I am not God or a troll, although I am quite impressed that you managed to get both of those words in the same disjointed sentence. In future please can we limit the Blasphemy?

As for what intellect ppx have at their disposal, the announcement mentioned UBS. Having dealt with UBS on a variety of issues, I am not inspired.

>>I found the "high moral ground" stance of pigs and Graham a bit wearing, >>but basically bright guys.

I agree that Graham and Co are clever guys.

I don't agree with their stance and I think they have cost us all money. Had I been running the campaign, I probably wouldn't have frightened away the only bidder. Maybe a better course of action would have been "constructive engagement" to try and get a better price for everyone.

Rather than fight over who gets the biggest piece of the pie, why not negotiate for a bigger pie?

>Time to go back to the tea party Cleo, Alice misses you.

Your knowledge of Fairy Tales is truly impressive!