Thank you Giz. You ask a very good question. I said at the...

Thank you Giz. You ask a very good question.

I said at the time, and still think, that the decision of Chua and Wachtel to capitulate at 84c in early December was naïve, weak and disgraceful, especially as they would have had access to the latest internal figures and perhaps forecasts. They also knew what range of values their own independent expert had given; and they should have seen that RG was insulting everyone by offering only 1c above the bottom end of that range. I was shocked and furious with them. As I said before, I think they deluded themselves into thinking that they had “done their job” by getting 84c. I’m puzzled that IML folded at 84c but that’s IML’s business. I can only guess that Chua and Wachtel suffered from “anchoring bias” and, because RG had started with such an absurdly low offer, they thought “they” had done well to get 84c, although that would have been IML’s negotiation with RG, not their work.

I agree it was bad judgment. It’s inexplicable given that Chua would crystallise such a big personal loss. However, I expect that they supported 84c in good faith, even though it was- in my opinion- a lousy decision. It is very hard to prove that directors were not acting in shareholders’ best interests (i.e. by being reckless, negligent or dishonest), as distinct from showing (very) poor judgment. There are hundreds of examples of huge good-faith Board errors, even at BHP and RIO etc. From that point on, I gave little credence to their views, but I would be very reluctant to say that it was not their genuine opinion at the time on behalf of shareholders, even if it was dumb! Other shareholders may well disagree.

Of course, with the benefit of hindsight in the full FY24 results, it now looks even more stupid! I expect that they got legal advice in writing to cover themselves, but that would have been about their duty, not commercial values. The best thing remaining shareholders can do is be very sceptical, listen to experts and rely on their own judgment. This matter will ultimately play out based on what the biggest minority holders want, who will be well- advised and not swayed by bullshit!