Personally I am not a fan of takeovers. As a long term investot...

Personally I am not a fan of takeovers. As a long term investot I try to find good managers with a different view of their marketplace to the herd of competitors. PAC (and its former iteration Treasury Group) is a rarity in the funds management space, it is more akin to the incubator/mentor you see in the IT space. So when a bunch of shorter spivs like Regal make a low ball pitch for a disruptor with a track record of growing wealth for the funds it backs and we shareholders I fear my small position holding will be sold cheap. Good riddance to these buy and flip merchants.

GQG like PAC are outliers in their category, outperforming their peers. I don't really see synergies with PAC apart from start up funding and management shared histories. As a holder of both I'd rather they both stick to what they do best.

I am happy the press and generally positive exposure PAC has received thanks to the Regal attempt to make an offer has pushed our share price up to a more realistic level than the $6ish range of the last few years. Their press release signalling their withdrawal was careful to protect this new shareprice, they obviously won't be selling out short term. Unless you as trader are looking to make a short term gain no bidding war doesn't matter... PAC is a very good long term dividend paying money maker, so if the price falls back the yield merely increases on further entries.