Sdl valuation, page-3

panzer - that has been explained before by others...in that it is cheaper to buy the company than go into a JV arrangement. SDL's asking price for a 50% stake must have been too high compared with the actual market cap. IMO hanlong were always one of the parties SDL were talking to about a JV but when the Talbot 20% stake came on the market they probably thought we don't need a JV, we can buy 20% now and the rest of the company later. The trouble with countng on SDL being able to do a deal with another JV partner is a) who is left to negotiate with?, and b) in anycase a JV deal will require shareholder approval. Hanlong's 20% stake makes that difficult, especially if DB have been warehousing shares for them, and c) smells awfully like Hanlong have done a deal with the Cameroon gov't to secure a mining convention agreement.

Some people seem to be placing an awful lot of weight on what was in the qtrly regarding JV discussions but GJ has been saying for a while now that these are 'well advanced' without actually getting a deal done. Who knows what 'well advanced' means but he said that in Sep last year and nearly a year later still nothing so don't know why people suddenly expect something to happen in next few weeks.