Thanks Bubby for answering. My interpretation was that the...

Thanks Bubby for answering.
My interpretation was that the following sentence from the constitution meant that a proxy can only vote yes or no, but for unlimited members, but they cannot vote yes for some members they represent and no for others? A proxy may vote on a show of hands but a person holding a proxy for more than one Member has only one vote.
If your interpretation would be correct this would need all small shareholders being either themselves or a proxy physically at the meeting which would potentially make the meeting very big and/ or eliminate the shareholder rights to a minimum.

With the Senior Lenders having 34%, and the 2 Todds and Republic Management about 14% together, we would need to mobilize >20% of small shareholders to vote against if we assume that only the SL vote for and the Todds and Republic Mgmt would vote against the SPA. I think the Todds where buying at a shareprice of about 5ct AUD.

I am still hopeing that there will be a superior offer emerging, because Cobalt opportunities and mature copper projects are rare at the market at these price points. As a major player, you would need to offer 100M $ , restructure the debt as they can refinance much cheaper and you have a very profitable asset that immediately adds to your top and bottom line + the cobalt dreams. Difficult to find these days.