my opinion @bigblackbear: the headcount will be more than 60%...

my opinion @bigblackbear: the headcount will be more than 60% and will have voted more than 86 million shares and even if not the court will not give priority or precedence to the number of shares voted over the headcount test even if they own less than 10% of the shares especially in light of the well-documented irregularities that have been at play.
A one-sided scheme booklet
An unreasonably protracted voting period supported by phone calls to shareholders supplied biased info.
Variations of so called fair and reasonable valuations from 11 cents to 14 cents to 21 cents each time supported by the b o d as being in the best interests of the shareholders.
just to name a few.
Asic won't stand for it. The Supreme Court won't allow it. The headcount rule is there for a reason. It is to prevent the tragedy of the commons And I bet you can't find one example in case law where in similar circumstances a judge has run roughshod over the headcount rule. Nope, the judge would have to set a precedent I reckon and in the unlikely event of this happening then the gloves would be off and we would have a bare knuckle fist fight class-action which we shareholders would win on appeal. it would be beautiful to watch ... but it's not going to get to this point. The no vote will win and pfizer will be a partner/ customer