Howdy Bullwinkle, no, I didn't miss your point, more the case of...

Howdy Bullwinkle, no, I didn't miss your point, more the case of me avoiding it as I'm not sure I have an adequate response. But having been called out I'll give it a crack.

I can only think that Spartan's board would argue that the company is undertaking two drilling campaigns so they only need to report on the results from those two campaigns in toto. Of course, if some of the drilling revealed results that are outrageously unexpected then an ad hoc announcement would be required. But as long as the results from the two programs are broadly in line with expectations then I think Spartan can treat the two programs as two discrete reportable events.

This is what the independent expert indicated on page 12 of their report: "On 30 January 2025, Spartan announced the commencement of a new 85,000m surface and undergrounddrilling program. This includes 20,000m of surface drilling planned for the first six months of the calendaryear 2025, and 65,000m of underground drilling planned for the year."

Why would Spartan management try to bundle announcements together and slow the flow of news down, seeing continuous disclosure is still required during a corporate transaction? Possibly countering that legal obligation is the practical difficulty of preparing the scheme booklet and independent expert's report which can best be done by Spartan and Ramelius flying in close formation - both are still flying independently of each other but over the 4^1/2 months of the scheme of arrangement process they are keeping pace with each other. The reason I mentioned that I thought Ramelius put out a dud mine plan just before it announced its intention to acquire Spartan is because I suspect that the Ramelius team was easing back to better sync with Spartan (was the mine plan a lie by Ramelius? No, but it did not put the company in its best light in my opinion and caused the RMS share price to fall away). In a similar way I think that in normal times Spartan would be putting out numerous updates about the two drilling programs but in these circumstances it wants to stay in formation with Ramelius, both cruising along steady as they go.

So does this synchronised flying disadvantage Spartan shareholders? As I pointed out in my previous post, in roughly the three months since the deal was publicly announced SPR shares are up about 50% and RMS shares have hardly moved. I think SPR shareholders have actually done quite well during this process, and have not been disadvantaged.

Now, I'm pretty sure someone will rip into this response as being bunkum. That's fine, teach me something. It is just that I have noticed similar synchronisation in several recent scheme of arrangements I have followed. They all seem to do it, more or less, which suggests that within the guide rails provided by continuous disclosure rules such formation flying is allowable.