I must be missing something here. So shareholders who had a...

I must be missing something here.

So shareholders who had a DIRECT interest in UG and Satipharm, will now have an INDIRECT interest in these - is this correct?

When this kind of transaction has taken place before, with other stocks I have been involved with over the years, the shareholders are granted gratis shares in the spin-off entity, because they have effectively lost 30% or more of direct interest in the major entity as a result of the spin-off.

Why weren't MMJ shareholders compensated with gratis shares in Strike?

My "limited" understanding at the moment, is this is possibly a good corporate move, but not a good retail shareholder move - but I'm not completely sure.

They originally trumpeted the fact that they are a single "vertically integrated" company, and that this is what gave them the advantage, so correct me if I'm wrong, but have they now changed that opinion?

I'm not that happy with this move, because basically they could do in MMJ everything they want to do in Strike anyway.

And why not just delist MMJ from the ASX and relist on the TSX if these type of stocks are so much more appreciated on the TSX, and keep the group together.

Gw