Giddy,Again in your pendant world you maintain that “the...

Giddy,

Again in your pendant world you maintain that “the substitution of one work [sic] for another becomes some form of loosey goosey and has some relationship to money. Like yourself I am also tiring of the tactic used by “the Pinders” such as Intel to take snide pot shots at what he sees could be the potential failure, or underhandedness, of the ASOF deal. Perhaps Anthony Mundine has taken poor sportsmanship lessons from Intel.

Again, as has been the tactics of Intel and others, you have accused me of being the single biggest supporter of ASOF. Despite my denials of being an apologist for them, I had been, as were you, a supporter of any transparent and realistic proposal to allow MST a further lease of life. Given that there was only one proposal that fitted this, who else could I have supported, and continue to support? Certainly, I was not, nor were you, prepared to countenance any proposal based wholly and solely “trust us”. I have also agreed with others that the shareholders have been screwed however, I also am well aware of the risk taken by myself as a shareholder in the event of a company failure. I have never accepted that I as a shareholder have any god given, or other, right to be treated above others higher in the pecking order.

I agree that the words “could” or “may” may have been more applicable than the word “would”. However, whatever spin you choose to put on it if ASOF cannot get the conditions of the deed approved, liquidation is probably the only alternative. Do you really believe that ASOF is going to keep amending the terms of the DOCA until such time as it appeases the Shareholders? Of course ASOF could undertake the feared privatisation route, but that does not seem to suit their current business plan. Unless you have another take on it neither liquidation nor privatisation are good results for us.

You seem keen to suggest that ASOF is being devious in seeking ASX waiver of Listing Rule 10.13.3, to avoid asking Shareholder’s opinion (?) and also a sign of fear that Shareholders may not agree. On what do you base your theory? Given that the Shareholder’s were advised, and should have been aware, of a possible major dilution of their shareholding on the issue of the convertible notes and upon the possible exercise of the notes. Therefore, this can hardly be a surprise and any reason for Shareholders not to agree. However, I would suggest that given that there are well established precedents for granting this waiver by ASX, ASOF would have good reason, and I believe sensibly, to have chosen this route. Perhaps ASOF, despite both you and Intel’s fear campaign, are being no more sinister, than wishing to avoid the time and expense of an EGM. Perhaps it is not as you seem to suggest that “ASOF seem want [sic] to bypass this risk”. ASOF have already outlined the course of action, in the announcement, that would have to be taken in the event that the waiver is not granted. Hardly seems to me that they will put us on notice of this if they have to/or are not prepared to go to an EGM, nor does there seem any intent that they are prepared to avoid it. Perhaps you can show me where in the announcement this is said or implied? Perhaps you are also very good at reading between lines. The conservation that I speak of is in regards the wording of the document not the intent of their actions.

I also disagree with you when you say “as the liquidation process hasn’t started the Company and ASOF can’t possibly know what offers for the IP may be received during the liquidation”. You would be well aware from reading the initial report to Creditors that during the initial administration period the Administrator offered the Company and it’s assets for sale it, advertised in the Fin Review, and provided details to over 85 of the Company’s customers, bid partners, prime contractors, weapon industry operators and competitors. This is pretty comprehensive and indicative of those who would be interested. Of these only 9 responded and as advised in that report to creditors, only one legitimate offer (i.e. paid the required deposit) was received to all assets of the Company including the IP for $100,000 and given that ASOF are owed some $13 million not a good start. I think that even you would have to concede a liquidation scenario would yield even less than a sale under administration. So there is comprehensive evidence to support the statement “Which would result in no return to shareholders and most unsecured creditors” Do you have any other suggestions as to how this would be handled by a Liquidator? However, as you say you could bid, and if you are prepared to pay enough for the secured, unsecured creditors and the Shareholders to get their money back, perhaps it you that is you who is the one who would be Loosey Goosy with his money, rest assured I will not be bidding with you.

Also I have taken the attitude that my money, while currently, is not lost and I have no chance of ever recovering anywhere close to the amount invested. However, if the Company ever becomes listed again I have the chance of perhaps recovering enough to pay for a good meal a better result than nothing, unless of course you bid!

What no P.S yet! Also perhaps others, on here, are throwing their hands up on the air at the prospect of another round of "ring around the rosie".