yes agree.
1. it is disappointing (but good and bad) that predator is MB.
2. MB history would show it is very much mercenary in practice
3. good to have RC as negotiator, as he would be a good match for MB
4. MB proposal should put a "floor" under SP
5. proposal may very well have put CTP in "play"! This is very often the result.
6. given MB is s/h in CTP, that may well be part of their motivation in lobbing an indicative proposal, at a price that they knew would be rejected.
7. I cannot believe that their proposal does not represent a conflict on interest. I am sure there will be a "Chinese wall scenario" defense, but give the various roles of MB in CTP, a number of Depts withing MB would be involved in the CTP client account, and each dept would be dealing with the other.
8 as we all know, the value of CTP is not the value today, but in 12-18mths.
9. MB is a very experienced Infrastructure funder, equity taker and owner, all around the world. it is also a very experienced player in the commodities area, all a round the world. It would have a wealth of experience to call upon. If it is keen to own 100% of CTP at 17.5c then it must be a bargain, because CTP, at this point is still way down the development and cash flow curve.
10. MB probably would not want to hold CTP for ever. It would continue to develop CTP, to a point where it would put CTP business into a fund, then flog it off at a profit to institutional investors once the dev't had been derisked.
Add to My Watchlist
What is My Watchlist?
