"sell immediately"... that's precisely what I have been...

"sell immediately"... that's precisely what I have been contemplating since the market price approached the offer price, given I'm sitting on a tidy profit (unlike most others here, it seems).

As it stands now, economically there is no difference between my selling now and "yes" winning. So your insinuations regarding "NTC-based comments" (am assuming you now think I'm part of a conspiracy to derail the "no" vote) are silly, at best.

However, my interest has been piqued by the "no" vote scheme's goal (personally I have no care for the methods employed). When it comes to shares, goals are measured in terms of the share price and the time in which it will be reached.

As mentioned above, I can sell out now and be happy with my 30% profit. But so many "no" voters have me thinking there's more profit to be had and that I'm a fool for not seeing how that would eventuate!

Hence the question(s):

1. What is the SP goal of the "no" voters (how much over the offer price?)

2. How quickly will it be reached (accuracy within half a year preferably)?

3. What will drive the SP appreciation (e.g. new management being able to secure large deals, an offer by a higher bidder, the development of new products, a stroke of luck, etc.)?

4. How are the items in (3.) justified (e.g. prior promises by current management, technical analysis, secrets, etc.)?

If I were to get convincing answers to these questions, it may convince me to join the "no" vote. Otherwise, I cannot justify subjecting significant capital to such high risks when a very profitable zero risk option exists. That's not how investment works.

And if the only goal is to spite a director - I'll be more than happy to walk away and let those who have lost everything enjoy their attempt at revenge.