looks like deutsche are doing their job, page-16

Hey all,

I have missed out watching lite-line because of other more pressing issues. Does anyone knows if there is a repeat of it ?? I don't watch television much at all. And if and when I do watch it, I usually fall asleep.

As you said Bundy, the provisions are there in the Act for any dissenting shareholders to present their case for the No Vote to the Court, and be heard. I do not think that any Judge would disallow that. And in facts, a judge may promote that part to occurr. So, IMO that is a good chance for someone to stall proceedings, as long as they are not frivolous ones.

ASIC has to also allow the Scheme to proceed and say that in their opinion the Scheme is good enough and fair and to be approved by the Courts. As to how ASIC will tackle these ESG issues, it is all in the air at this stage of the game.

Then don't forget, especially Hardmano and I think it was msa, that you won't be the only onee that is going to ask questions at the meeting.

I have been advised by the ASA that they will have someone there present, and IMO they are pretty good at asking questions and know how the meetings have to be run, believe me. So, IMO you should be trying to make contact with that ASA representative before the meeting, and work out a proper plan of attack.

Finally, I wish you all good luck with what you have set out to do. They (ESG & STO) do not deserve to get away with this one, and they should be held accountable for that.

What they have blatantly done, and the way they've treated shareholders is beyond belief and it should not be allowed.

One more thing before I finish.

It is very funny IMO that the sp moved up to 91 cents yesterday when it was capped for weeks and weeks on hand. May I suggest that both STO and ESG may have planned for some Instos to push the sp up in order to pacify shareholders in general. Because, if one has to take in consideration that the main concerns outlined in the media were that TRU got their 90 cents and the shareholders didn't, that part of the equation has now been solved as far as they were concerned.

IMO, they knew that they would have been in deep crapola, hence why they advised whom-ever we know of, to go out and increase the bid in order to counteract that claim, and make it impossible to stand/come up in a Court at a later date. I can assure everyone here that I have never ever seen that happening before, and I can also assure everyone that it is not the first time that one of the company I was invested in, was taken over by a way of a SoA.

Believe me, because IMO, you have got them worried.

Regards and good luck for today.