questions and comments from the "expert" repor, page-34

Hi Mark, I'm against the deal, I'm just not sure what can be achieved out of a spill motion, even if a second strike occurs (25% oppose) it does not mean they will lose the spill motion (51% oppose). the problem to my mind is will there be risk of BOD resigning to avoid the humiliation of spill occuring. I have felt from quite early on that they have stuck themselves in a corner with this. I have not changed my mind as to whether I should dump my asset or my board. I would prefer to keep both, just not sure I'll get what I want. I would consider changing the BOD if a better alternative was offered, there has been no sign of this occuring yet.

I disagree on your assumption that this is a done deal, there has been no major holder publicly declare backing to my knowledge.

Some of my bones of contention:
The company has been extremely poor in communication; that is something that is fixable.
Quarterly guidance on expenditure have been a waste of a sheet of paper.
Failure to manage cash balance properly & live with constraint: racking up 10 mil debt factility
Deviating from debt free ideology
Developing a strategic plan contrary to that ideology without sharing with S/Holders.

The whole CRE fiasco has been a thorn, Did Stone come in to simply cause damage to devalue us? I also hold suspicions that DB's sell down may be part of the engineering, however I have no evidencve of such & doubt I could ever prove it even if it were true. There are so many different ways to say thank you for your help, can be a box of chocolates from a second cousin. I'll clearly state that is simply my suspicion; it is in no way an accusation or in any way factual & does not even constitute an opinion; merely a conspiracy theory.

Voting NO to SD (I expect the 600k break fee to be contested if their offer has changed as we believe(dutch auction thread))
Voting YES to keeping current BOD (in the absence of a superior offer) but some shoes need some serious polishing.