xsv......."Hey Ocker, so what you are saying is that you are...

xsv.......
"Hey Ocker, so what you are saying is that you are happy for ANZ to have 30% ownership, just not 100%?? Doesn't make sense."

It makes a lot of sense to me (and anybody else that can understand the difference in control of a minority vs majority/full ownership).
For your benefit let me explain the way it works.
If you have a less than 50% (minority) ownership then you will be entitled to a seat(s) on the Board and have some input into the running of the company. But your number of seats will reflect your minority status, hence you will not be able to vote down any proposed changes. Similarly you cannot "force" any change.
Conversely, if you have a "majority" holding then the reverse applies.
Finally, if you have 100% ownership then you can do whatever you like without consulting anyone. This include R&D expenditure, changing strategic focus, etc etc.
In summary, yes I am happy with ANZ having a minority 34% stake, if it were to rise to 100% that MAY be a different story.