Bernie,Gidday. I will have a look at your math shortly but in...

Bernie,Gidday. I will have a look at your math shortly but in the meantime there are 2 points that are worth considering carefully...... Point 1. The WK scenario is inequitable on ordinary shareholders as those in the know have an interest (to say the least) in seeing the SP FALL (at least as long as they dont overdue it). As they have the master plan at their disposal (and the rest of us dont) to get the SP down usually means doing nothing specific. A company at the end (?) of a long drop in its SP will see it fall even more,simply by a making no announcements that might affect the SP.........Point 2. It is a dodgy situation as far as control is concerned to permit an outsider to become the largest shareholder , no matter how much you think you have him under control as you will likely give him a platform for him to get to a majority position. A way to keep the outsider under control would be to limit the voting rights attaching to his shares- but you cant do that for reasons that are obvious(his shares must be the same animal as the ordinary shareholder was going to get,had he subscribed). I see the WK as being connected to the inner circle (that was the situation in all 3 instances that I keep referring to ) and is unlikely to be the deep-pocketed outsider( who can be given his reward for providing funding in other ways than allocating him shares). Cheers