"Ruane taking it private for peanuts always a possibility"(what...

"Ruane taking it private for peanuts always a possibility"

(what a lot of people are thinking but it takes guts to say it out loud, because you imply that could be an agenda).

ok i did agree with you that logically it did make some sense, for a merger...they now have similar market caps, operate out of the same address, and are effectively controlled by the same people.

i made the comment a while ago that they seem to be compartmentalizing assets, and want to keep reward as a pure sop company.

(a) probably because there is a lot going on with reward on a world scale and potential jv partners like to know that with reward they know exactly what they are dealing with...the structure is clean and simple, this is also reflected in the ownership of the patents...could the metalurgical team have taken the patents and dealt on a world scale as a group of individuals but chose to licence under the reward banner...(i dont know to what extent this is a legal issue, but it makes sense if the agenda is to privatise down the track anyway).

(b )from an ego and personal point of view ruane has a lot invested in reward...he certainly values it a lot more than it's present price and to merge the two companies would be an admission that reward has the same value as empire when this is only a temporary strange anomaly in the market.

i sold most of my meager holding in reward at around what i paid for them (12c), because i couldn't see anything happening with the single asset (lake disapointment), for a long long time, but i always held the view that i could jump back in quickly when things started to move.

reward will always get the money it needs as long as the management has it's level of control...another capital raise and another dilution wont worry them...if the ordinary shareholders cant afford to contribute that's the shareholders problem...not managements, it means them moving to a position of greater control, and by the time the company takes off remaining shareholders could be irrelevant.