comparable valuations, page-5

Ht, PNA was a begger they came into this "crisis" hugely geared unlike OZ (lowly geared), and like OZ had to find new debt at not a dissimilar time to OZ, they managed to work through it. IMO OZ was in a much stronger financial position than PNA.

Even after PNA's capital raising its gearing level will be very close to that of the whole of OZ.

I (and others Im sure) have asked OZ to do a rights issue, as far back as last year, Management and board thought that idea to be too dilutive. Whats more dilutive than having to sell most of your company off, at prices considered by even someone, being paid hansomely by OZ, as being below even their lowest valuations.

At current x-rates we will be getting $1.550 billion, AU$200 mil less than the figure AU$1.75 billion often mentioned for the MM assets.
But our debt has also decreased around AU$70 million and with the sale of Martabe and a capital raising, even a 1 for 3 at 70c preferably renouncable or non-renouncable with the provision to apply for extras(if undersubscribed)
our debt would be all but gone.

How can the management of OZ justify selling our assets at such undervalued prices, when they havnt even givin the owners of those assets US, the opportunity to contribute funds to avoid this firesale, it seems nearly every second company is boosting thier balance sheets via rights, whats the difference with OZ.

Ht, I have spent months (even last week) trying to find a plan B, to give holders a real option, but unfortunately only the management of OZ can do that.

I am not asking anyone to vote NO, although I will be voting NO.

Do you think that the three big aussie banks will risk the ire of over 100,000 OZ shareholders and put OZ into admin, with such low gearing ratio and earning such high fees, seem unlikely to me, but I know no more than anyone else.

Geoff the small holders could have a pretty loud voice too, but will post that tonight, Im late for work.

cheers grant

the above is opinion only and written without prejudice