Ann: SML Announcement - Supreme Court Update, page-61

The transcript for the call of your so called "concession" that changed your view so dramatically is dated the 12th of September. Your rant, however, started on the 11th of September
Which was a day before the annual results were announced - seems as good a time as any to make a post. I don't know when the transcript was available (other than it was past close of business on the 12th) as I don't check their announcements page ever day. Care to enlighten us?

until you backflipped on the 17th of September. Synlait didn't make a "...concession at this eleventh hour..." like you have said. Instead you just didn't see it and conceived your rant based of your own personal incorrect presumptions.
I haventy ranted - just outlined the information as I see it.

What makes you think that it has not always been Synlait's stance all along to not oppose a quarry? Your own presumptions.
Well that's really simple to answer. They would have made this concession at the High court and at the Appeal court - would have made their arguments stronger and consistent. That they didn't and only chose to do it after the Supreme Court oral hearing date was known leads me to conclude it was "eleventh hour"

Regardless, whether Synlait would oppose or not is Synlait's right to do so. So it wouldn't change anything. The only reason that Synlait is being diplomatic is because of the fact that they are a publically traded company.
Diplomatic?? Saying we are continuing negotiations and then slapping a Supreme Court hearing on the table. That aint too diplomatic!