Exactly.......happy to be pointed out that I'm wrong, but this...

Exactly.......happy to be pointed out that I'm wrong, but this seems to be the situation to me :
PAF holders receive an "implied value" of :

"23.8% premium to PAF’s closing price immediately prior to this announcement; and
24.3% premium to PAF’s 3 month VWAP"

Not sure of the second measurement, but looking at the 3M chart, it would look to roughly average ~yesterday's closing price of 0.97, and must be fractionally less.
Therefore, PAF holders are receiving, in "implied value", 1.20.

This compares to the most recent post tax NTA (as at 10th Sept) of 1.15, the realisation of this figure (less wind up costs) would have been the logical construct. In fact, the 1.15 is cum ff 0.025 dividend, which went ex today !
So, value premium we pass to PAF, vs PAF next best alternative, is at least ~7% 120/(115-2.5), ignoring any ff value

The merge concept may be logical, but the slicing of the value pie does not appear symmetrical.
Despite the absence of any sound explanation from our Board as to why this is, I'm nowhere near cynical enough to even contemplate performance fee optimisation...