Thanks for your support and your action Second. It would be...

Thanks for your support and your action Second. It would be interesting to know the identity of that "legal advisor" who is questioning OIP's so called independent experts to such a degree that the merger meetings have had to be delayed for a month. This delay would also give those OIP shareholders who had voted in favour of the merger an opportunity to become better informed and change their vote.

ESG has indicated that it would be voting its 23% interest in OIP in favour of the merger (pers comm). But it makes no sense financially for ESG to have its JV partner (OIP) burdened with GGX's cash-hungry tenements for this would mean less funds available for OIP to fund its JVs with ESG.

Nor would it be sound financal sense for ESG to make a bid for OIP in its merged condition, because in that condition there would be less available funds to spend in NSW and the share register would be swelled by those who were GGX shareholders.

ESG shareholders ought to be asking their board to justify their voting in favour of the OIP/GGX merger when ESG's interests would be far better served by voting against it.