I just don't get the numbers these guys are spruiking. From "1.2...

I just don't get the numbers these guys are spruiking. From "1.2 Rationale" of the upcoming meeting agenda they say they received approx US$105 million on 29 March (and then provide A$156 million as the conversion, which equates to FX rate of approx $0.67, which matches the rate of the day), and final payment of US$16 million on 29 Sept (no conversion offered). The FX rate on 29 Sept was closer to $0.64, but even using their previous conversion number ($0.67) the second tranche equates to approx A$23.8 million. So total sale is approx A$179.8 million, meaning their intended return of 89.4% would be approx $160.7 million. Or if we use the $0.64 exchange rate of 29 Sept ($US16 mill = A$25 mill), total sale is $181 million, 89.4% return is approx A$161.8 million.

So how do they arrive at a return to shareholders of only A$154,700,426?

And why the 65/35 split on Capital/Dividend return? Surely a greater Capital return is in most shareholder's best interests? The former may or may not be a CGT event for some shareholders, but the later will most definitely be a tax headache for most. Anyone know if this is driven by ATO requirements?