xxxxwww,You winding us up with that comment right. "given pp a...

xxxxwww,

You winding us up with that comment right. "given pp a thumbs up for some reasonable logic". Incorrect facts, incorrect figures and unrepentant about doing so. How does that equate to "reasonable logic" ?

The answer to your other question lies in the circumstances behind the placement being questioned and a correction the the assumnption therein. Firstly it is important to note that WM wasn't forced to sell anything. When the stock took a rather quick dive after the August JORC last year it became clear that the volatility was significantly exagerated by the fact that the register was chock full of retail investors and had no institutional investors with significant holdings.

CDU management were advised that they could stabalise the stock if a cornerstone investor was brought onto the register. M&G took an initial placement from CDU at a relatively low price but subsequently went on to buy loads loads more stock on market.

So the placement wasn't a case of WM being forced to sell as it was put but a strategic decision to stabalise the register. The company wasn't short of money at the time so it wasn't about that.

Since then we have another cornerstone investor who has brought in at almost double the price paid by M&G and looking to take on more if they are allowed. So the register has completely transformed in the last 12 months with multiple cornerstone investors holding a large chunk of the company. Liquidity of retail stock has been reduced and continues to reduce as the buyback removes retail stock from the market in the low $3 range which is intended to be reissued to large investors for $3.80 or more.

So to answer your question "can you elaborate why the circumstances that WM was forced to sell wont repeat", there was no forced sale and the strategy of bringing on cornerstone investors has already been instigated and it has done what it was supposed to, ie reduce retail stock liquidity and stabalise the price. CDU more than doubled from the low point post JORC. With various major holders and potential holders lined up to take on more stock the problem that prompted the M&G placement has been resolved and CDU is in the relatively luxurious position of having an active buy back picking up stock on market and selling it to O&W and others at about a 16% profit. Not bad right ?

Still, some people don't get it. Any of us would dream of being in the position that CDU is in. If you could buy large amounts of any stock at say $3.19 and have a line of buyers willing to take as much as you can give them for $3.80 or more, how happy would you be ?