Hi @thebear I agree that Samuel Terry probably isn't doing this...

Hi @thebear

I agree that Samuel Terry probably isn't doing this for you and me.  However, to me it is very clear that what they're proposing would benefit all of us hugely.  

There's also the alternative to be considered.  You seem to be planning to vote no because you are unhappy ST aren't doing this 'for' you.  Do you really think AIMS are managing APW for you?  If so, why have they charged fees on fees for years, and only changed their tune when challenged by ST?  Why haven't they used spare cash to buy back stock at the huge NTA discount, which would be both risk free and massively accretive to NTA?  The list goes on.  Between AIMS and ST, one of them has a conflict of interests with the resolution, and it sure isn't ST!  So why would you pay more heed to AIMS's conflicted encouragement?

I also have difficulty understanding why you wouldn't want your investment to be worth $2 rather than $1.55.  If you weren't planning to exit in the short or medium term, I get that, but wouldn't you still be much better off taking $2 per unit and putting it into something that's run better, and yields more?

FD