"Statements made in the course of a takeover must not be misleading or deceptive."
The above apparently is an interpretation of Australian TakeOver law from www.ibanet.org/Document/Default.aspx?DocumentUid...E880...
Minemakers said in an ASX statement on 4th May 2012
"Minemakers regards Patersons’ recommendation as a strong, independent endorsement of its Offer."
Therefore the question of whether the research is "independent" is probably quite important.
The monetary value of the MAK offer of course remains worth less than the highest price paid by MAK for UCL shares during the last 12 months. Such TakeOvers aren't allowed in the UK. Furthermore, MAK is seeking control, for which a substantial premium needs to be paid. A previous poster called MAK a market miner rather than a mineral resource miner. All the best.
clarification of views, page-5
-
- There are more pages in this discussion • 1 more message in this thread...
You’re viewing a single post only. To view the entire thread just sign in or Join Now (FREE)
