smh article - 23/3, page-26

mreye2

I am not sure I agree with this aggressive campaigning - there could be a lot more motives in this proposed 'friendly' deal which we are not privy to. Yes a bit of objective and informed investigative journalism wouldn't hurt; but there will be some press representation at an AGM; at the very least there will be a mention in the papers or a report published by an analyst - is that so???

This is still 'our' company we are talking about, which we want to succeed and we want to come along for the wonderful ride and this is the reason I have objected for so long to the public and very negative discussion of the issues.

I also believe moral or ethical reasons do not move people in the corporate world; they have multiple tools to camouflage anything underhand - all legal.

The only real chance we've got - IF WE'VE GOT THE NUMBERS - is a NO vote to the proposed sale or ask for a higher price - or an amendment which says something along the lines:

"Recently rare earths price have increased by 5 to 10 times* since 2007 and we as shareholders of Lynas believe the proposed sale of the Crown Resource for $20.7 million to Forge does not represent fair value. We therefore propose a valuation by an independent third party before the sale can go ahead. Should Forge decide to increase its offer, consideration should be given to such, but such offer also to be evaluated by said independent third party and the results and the proposed sale and price put to a vote before another EGM." (* pick a number)

Or such-like - English is my second language - .

I have also during this last sleepless night mused on certain scenarios:

What if: Lynas do need more money and really do not wish to sell Crown to an outside party, because it might be easy to be swallowed up by a much larger company/competitor who've bought in next-door.

What if: Lynas are concerned about the primary company getting caught up in some corporate t/o game etc. - at least there will be the valuable Crown deposit to be developed, with a company man in charge?

What if they want to sell Lynas to the best bidder, once it's off and running and then concentrate on the more valuable Crown deposit? Would FIRB approval still be needed once they're producing over in Malaysia?

There could a lot more, murkier, motives, but I, initially, prefer to view my fellow-man/woman as honest.

Whatever is going on, we deserve to be informed and rather than assuming the worst, we should put our collective minds into drafting some pertinent questions to be sent to the company before the meeting in May to give them a chance to answer properly.

Re Oliver Curtis: I was more interested in the fact that his specialities seem to be take-over deals, friendly and not-so friendly and that his ethics, at least when it came to a childhood friend, were questionable.

If we don't have the numbers for an amendment, or an extra agenda item to be added, or time is running out (as seems to have been hinted at here earlier), we should concentrate on getting pertinent questions answered at that meeting, at the very least, to put our minds at rest.

I know things are not how they have been presented, but there could be perfectly sound reasons for these proposed transactions. Price is everything in my view.

Cheers

Taurisk


P.S. Disclaimer: I am a retired secretary and have no qualifications other than having survived the GFC and life generally (so far ;-)).