Ann: Change in substantial holding , page-39

As in previous post, this is my personal reason that why it does not make sense for GCL to be behind UBS shorting. It could be very subjective.

recently i had done a lot of reading on chinese national strategy of CTL.

China energy board has shown a lot of interest in CTL since 2004 and inspected many oversea companies and technologies since 2009. The conclusion was, chinese technologies were not mature enough to go industralization. Thus a hard brake was put down to stop further industralization of CTL plants. Bringing in advance technologies from oversea such as south africa, usa, japan, germany and etc, was a more favourable plan, however foreign companies asked for too much.

Usually they ask for 50/50 split JV. And chinese government has deemed that to be unrealistic.There was no mentioning of any concern on the upfront once-off payment in the document i read. CTL is not just business matter but a long term nation security strategy matter.

In the GCL case, 16-17/April the deal was signed by GCL and LNC as shown in my last post. Just to repeat a little paragraph here: China national energy deputy director inspected LNC accompanied by Zhu Gong Shan. The time is exactly when the deal was signed. Prior to that, National energy board director has already inspected LNC. From a seperate document that i read, China finally selected lnc over other foreign companies offering technology in CTL industry. (Maybe one of the reason is lnc asked for 33% rather than 50%. I feel quite comfortable that selecting Lnc wasn't an ad-hoc decision). These officials are very high ranking, pretty much the highest you can get in this matter.

Maybe it is out of courtesy, but from the wording, it was the director inspected LNC, not Zhu. Zhu was an accompany. (As in my very early post, i said, Peter bond was a small fish, Zhu was bigger, but there are even bigger boys behind this).Signing of agreement also took place while chinese officials were onsite.

If taking over Lnc or acquiring larger share is of chinese's interest, i doubt money would trouble them. It would be more of the FIBR that get in the way more than anything else. It simply does not make sense to escalate the whole thing to national level, then hire a hitman UBS to save a few million here and there to stir up the pot.