While I have always respected you opinions and points of view...

While I have always respected you opinions and points of view haasko, in this case I think you are being a little naive. This board has been clearly proven to mendacious, completely untrustworthy and unethical. To trust them with one more dollar or one minute beyond midnight is fraught with peril. They are clearly capable of any sort of deception.

They are for the jump and the sooner the better.

Do please note that I have made no comments whatsoever on the merits of the current board, I have simply pointed out the conventional methodology of renewal, should the NO vote prevail. Which is perfectly cost efficient and achievable without us all running around like headless chickens. A 249 meeting must be called within 2 months after notice is given to the company, which would take us through to mid July. The second court hearing for the approval of the scheme is 7 June. And if the YES prevails, then MacBnk is in charge of whatever renewal they may want from that date. In this case any 249 costs devolve to MacBnk. But if the NO vote prevails then the costs are borne by the continuing listed CTP, which means us shareholders. And do be aware that in such a GM, the board at the time can propose directors for election as well as CB and the CTPSA, quite a melange. There does not have to be a choice between pre-packaged boards.

Fini