nextime2...I'll take your use of the word "interesting" to...

nextime2...

I'll take your use of the word "interesting" to describe my comment as a euphemism for "you're wrong".

It's more complicated than that.
Insiders obviously have much more than the 34% indicated by the "yes" vote. They only vote the percentage they need to do, to pass the resolution. This is like a game of pocker... why show you've got 4 aces when 2 aces wins anyway. OK, (for some of them)... "they feel no need to vote".. But for the others... voting is pissing in the wind, just gets you feeling dirty.

Insiders might have 67% of the vote. So they already know the possible "no" voters would only have 33%, Meaning that only 34% yes voters need to show up to get the job done. Any one who thinks the result are ever in doubt is an idiot.

Having only 34% of yes voters turning up to vote, creates the illusion that the approx. 60% of shareholders who did not vote are not alligned.

New shareholders are more likely to put money in if they think they are part of a dominant non alligned group who can have some influence on the company. They have no way of knowing that the dominant group is run like a private club which has a dubious history of distributing shareholders funds and benefits. And they have no idea how close the insiders are to crossing the 90% privatisation threshold. Would those insiders be interested in revealing exactly how close they are to 90%...showing their full hand? No way, look at their history!!!

CLZ want the best of both worlds. They want the benefits of a private organization plus the benefits of a public company (for the moment) with access to billions of possible investors world wide.

ALL IN MY OPINION ONLY...THERE'S A 50% CHANCE i MIGHT BE WRONG AGAIN.