takeover

From the other side of the world.....
I saw Bruce Grey talk at Guildford, UK, then bought 4000 shares

This is a terrible deal for shareholders, and a very shrewd move from the US.

Last figures show steady but not exponential treatment take up, and I'm sure the marketing arm of this firm will work to drive sales in the smaller hospitals to which much of the US business depends. They are taking advantage of the sales growth lull to pounce.

It is probably a good move if it means quicker take up of spheres, and who can blame the management for wanting to capitalise on their success: professor Grey has been working on this for 20 years! Perhaps management are scared of the effect of global recession. Perhaps there is a trial problem or toxicity details we do not know about, and once released, the share price was to plummet.

Without further information the price offered makes no sense to me: why sell out for so little if there is cash left in the bank? It strikes me that the 'inventors' who essentially run the company, have no stomach or interst for the product development stage.

I would prefer the company to remain independant, since I am happy to keep my money in for 2-3 years. This, I'm sure offers the greatest potential for shareholders.

I will not accept less that less than $AUS10 per share, and would be disappointed to do that.

VOTE AGAINST!