I'm struggling to make sense of today's announcement. A few points:
Pfizer first offered 11.5c, who knows on what basis, and now the IER 'expert report' comes up with 20.7c 'average' - but on what basis? I flicked through the doc, but did not see any basis for it - unlike @Taurean7 excellent analysis.Our commercially hopeless board recommended that 11.5c, based seemingly ONLY on a simple premium over current SP that Pfizer offered -they offered no other rationale or explanation.
From today's ann, in the absence of documented factual/logical financial analysis from the IER (have I missed something?), the IER 20.7c 'average' remains meaningless to we shareholders. What time frame were they looking at? What potential (if any) for revenue and profit growth did they take into account - or is the IER value based solely on "today"?
And, once again, our hopeless board recommended the revised offer - without any rationale or explanation other than a bigger "premium" over recent SP arising from the IER.
We are being treated like mushrooms - kept in the dark and fed meaningless snippets of information
I remain totally unimpressed with our board at this stage of our development, and disillusioned that anything will change. Why could they or the IER not lay out forward looking optimistic/pessimistic base cases for potential commercial success, with the technical foundations and market opportunities that lie ahead of us???
I still vote NO
