It's a big NO from our motley crew. Combined shareholding...

It's a big NO from our motley crew. Combined shareholding exceeds all directors' holdings except for the top 2 holdings.

What exactly does Livent have to offer that AKE doesn't already have ???. Bigger conversion capacity ( AKE has 10K Naraha and more on the way via expansion (?), no hurry here as meager margin or the lack of ) means more no-margin conversion business and with the exchange of shares at that ratio it means more dilution of AKE's high-margin LC/Spod business. Masses of conversion capacity are on the way outside of China so low-margin conversion business is likely to persist for some years to come.

As for the argument that both companies share prices have been trading in the very narrow range of the exchange ratio since the announcement - Another way to look at it - That is not a validation of market acceptance of the deal being fair but rather market pricing in the agreed ratio and AKE is tied to Livent (a drag on AKE's share performance.)

AKE's near-term pipeline development will be a major boost and we have both geographical and product diversification too and don't need any more "augmentation" unless the ratio is revised to reflect the above and the massive James Bay resource update subsequent to the announcement.

AKE shareholders paying dearly to become the 3rd largest player after the merger and for a one-off cost savings from combined synergies. We would rather be smaller and be rewarded with a better share price performance based on standalone valuation.

I don't think anyone is against the merger per se and we are all for the merger ( contingent on a revised ratio ) where AKE shareholders do benefit proportionately from the merger via a fairer exchange. And we are happy to be in the same boat (bigger) post-merger come what may....