or were Nomura's funding options were rejected in favour of this...

or were Nomura's funding options were rejected in favour of this set up? Hence it resigned? seems a little too cosy for my liking!

And the gun to the head! Vote no and the money is immediately repayable.

The real problem is whether the company's management is looking at other options should this one be rejected by shareholders.

Whether the Board and Management like it or not, there is a real conflict here. The advisors should be independent and we should get advice from someone independant that this is the best deal the company can do. Without independent advice, there will always be doubts and conspiracy theories surrounding this.

If one looks at this objectively, for 200,000 pounds the Chairman has guaranteed his continued ownership of 4.7 percent of the company's assets. If all shareholders were given similar rights, I suspect we would all kick in.