I find this quite interesting too, if indeed the Plan B is a...

I find this quite interesting too, if indeed the Plan B is a viable option.
I guess it comes down simply to BOD subjective prioritisation of the plans. If Plan B is viable, why wouldn't the BOD progress this plan as Plan A and the MB takeover as the Plan B? Surely it is within the powers of a BOD to say that: "Yes, the MB takeover option is potentially fair and reasonable, but we deem that it is our Plan B option as we have a viable plan to take us foward which we deem and prioritise to be our Plan A focus", or words to that effect.

IMO it is just a simple sell out to MB with little concern for lesser shareholders. Likely one of the first negotiations behind the scenes was whether the BOD get to keep their jobs/income with MB as owners, given that it was posted/reported earlier the one of the themes that came out of the SOA meeting was that the BOD were keen to keep their jobs post-NO vote.