re: Ann: Change of substantial holder increas... "Don't you think that they could have the same exposure with the added benefit of MAK's other plays by buying MAK?
So why would they need to fight over BON's register?"
Depends what assets you are interested in. MAK has a stable of assets, "other plays", that are only viable at high prices and several are just rubbish eg clapped out tin mines. Personally I have no interest in them and Wonarah only gets interesting with DSO. I would rather BON for exposure to Sandpiper than MAK for exposure to BON and the other stuff and I would not have BON at all if they hadn't gained exposure to Sandpiper via the JV with UCL.
Don't you think that if the MAK case was as persuasive as you think that 90% would be done and dusted already?
As things stand they haven't done enough. It might be that we get some good news over the next few weeks. I would be most happy to see MAK at say $1, in the meantime there is no compelling reason for me to accept the offer.
Why should I, or any other shareholder who's not currently impressed with the offer, give up control of our shares and close off our options before we have to? It's not our responsibility to prove the MAK offer is up to the mark. You guys think you're doing me a favour by taking over my company but can't put up a decent case to back your position. I couldn't care less about conspiracy theories over the common directors, just show me the money.
BON
bonaparte diamond mines nl
