Completely agree but this is gun at the head stuff, the way they...

Completely agree but this is gun at the head stuff, the way they say liquidity is poor and we won't sell (so this won't change). No other solutions are being offered.

The new management are not Australian based so one imagine are unlikely to have any regard to reputations or fiduciary duties.

The price is too low based on the upside and what is happening in the US market. I'd like to see an up to date independent valuation and revised NTA reflecting situation now and not one that refers back to 3 or 4 months ago.

A few things to add.

Refering to the premium over the highly dilutive rescue rights issues is inappropriate and misleading. What should have happened was that this issue should have been enough to put EDT on a stable footing. They should not deny investors the opportunity to benefit from a recovery. Targeting the offering size too low and then aiming for a cheap mop up bid is completely unethical. If they had more funds then why not do the right thing and increase the offering at the time to stabalise EDT and allow other shareholders similar rights.

They refer to premiums above other shares which is a comparison which seems inappropriate and incorrect
* firtly there are only 2 comparables which is hardly enough for anyone to assert an opinion (what happened to RCU another US fund btw- why was this excluded?)
* both comparables are Office funds which as everyone knows sare not directly comparable to Retail property (retail has a lower risk profile).
* the bidders statement could be misleading (ie I question whether they should amend/withdraw). TSO with a market cap of $200m is trading at a slight discount maybe 10% which would blow the argument that this offer (at 30% discount) is fair as the discount is lower than the EDT offer. What drags the average down is RNY a $30m fund with its own Major issues- including loan default- this is why this is trading at a Massive discount to NTA. To get to the figures quoted in the bid statement did they really just take a simple average?? If so this is misleading, inacurate and inappropriate and they should revise it. You can't take Woolworths and Reject Shop shares average the two and say this represents retail shares!! Don't they need to be weighted by size of assets or market cap. for a comparison to be made!!!!!

Very unhappy with how things are turning out and have seen nothing that anyone is actually looking after shareholders from an independant perspective. Where is the independent expert or independent directors??

This is enough to make blood boil.