JS,Am talking about corporate law not trying to put words in...

JS,

Am talking about corporate law not trying to put words in your mouth. Am on the trail to articulate this as I said but you are hell bent on a non-commercial conspiracy theories - that is just throwing red herrings around at the start of a process here. I don't want to fight with you JS you have exhibited great energy in here and that is what I have respected, clearly you are no dill. I am trying to assist people understand the business and the deal.

The hedge suggestion is what is ludicrous (your word - different context) IMO. Pinto nailed it IMO. SGG will want dividends that is commercial, dividends FROM FML (may retain at their end I don't care). Grow production, revenue and profitability so they can earn money from the investment - and grow the value of FML on their book - run exactly like a long term professional Fund.

They want income to assist their global expansion, probably why their dividends are currently low too, retaining profits. This is how it is done.

I can't believe you can think they would sink the FML ship to somehow make a 'gain', against corporate laws in another country risking prosecution and destruction of their good will to operate in another country. Sorry JS I don't get it.

This is a company making deal and what I saw earlier - by Jahar, he stated the Funds and large holders will decide - thank goodness for that. He is right however...

Ah ...I know just a handful of posters in HC own 100+M shares. They, not all but a few, and my other clients own loads, and unknown readers will own loads too - my guess is way north of 300M. I see frivolous statements made towards large holders at times and have to laugh, very savvy successful competent people ignored, scoffed at when posters could learn from them - presumably why the same posters are here in the first place.

Such irony. But the large holders are pro-deal and pro-listening and pro-making money with FML. Therefore this discussion is rapidly becoming a moot point. But to assist with the truth for remaining shareholders I hope the DT letter, my work, many others and even yours JS will help them to make the best decision that can for their position. In this sense it is worth discussing IMO.

The FML risk is a sliding scale made up across the spectrum of finances, mechanical and geological - even weather and sovereign. This deal is absolutely spectacular from that point of view. Risk diminishes significantly on agreement with this or even better - a superior deal. Far better for shareholders than other options to move FML forward with greater safety for our capital IMO.

Do well JS sorry, if you feel offended in any way.
Cheers,
CW
DYOR&DD