Takeovers Panel Referral?

The following posts were made on 7^th June and I am wondering whether anyone can refer an issue to the Takeovers Panel where it is believed that one group may have knowledge (and particularly inside information if that group sits on both boards, FMS and BBIG, and works for TIO or PIO) whilst the other shareholders in the company (FMS) do not have that information. This would allow the first group to increase their % of a company and could aid them in a takeover of that company without paying a premium.
Are there any costs in making this referral to the Takeovers Panel and is it a simple process?
Refer to these five posts on HC 7^th June 2018 –

1 - lifes4livin
It’s incredible that with everything going on around FMS with road and rail and this is the first time in a friggin long time management have started an announcement with the words....
“ We are pleased to announce”…….

I believe something else is going on, be it T/O or negotiations with OCJ.... something.

None of this is happening by chance, I believe there is and has been a strategy in place amongst themselves going back to when we successfully knocked back their pathetic offer and we dented their egos.

Time will tell folks, grab the popcorn and enjoy their show!!!!!!!

2 - jake002
"None of this is happening by chance......" - never a truer word said!

3- PS
Hi Jake. Something to do with "disclosure" perhaps? Doesn't the company have to make full disclosure when undertaking a CR. That would mean that our Todd directors who most likely know of BBIG's plans (as they are on both boards) will have to come clean otherwise they may be gaining unfair or insider advantage. Is that correct Jake?

4 - jake002
Goodaye PS - yes, when companies do a CR, they are required to state that all material information has been provided to s/h via ASX and via the prospectus/ Rights Issue documents.

Of course, they also have to provide the market with material info under the Continuous Disclosure rules of ASX - but we all know that FMS has not done that, because they have ignored the fact that Todd/BBIG has been happy to do deals with WA Govt claiming Todd/BBIG will secure the iron ore owned by FMS!

So when we get the CR docs we will see that again, FMS has ignored the fact that a 3rd Party has signed-away the principle asset of FMS.

And yes, Todd has control of FMS and its Board, Todd will be biggest subscriber of Rights Issue, and Todd/BBIG sits on both sides of fence. How do they know which hat to wear, when they make their decision to subscribe, or not subscribe, to the Rights Issue?

So when the Todd group make their decision to put more money into FMS via Rights Issue, THEY know what's going on, but the rest of us don't. We can only guess.

We need to be informed by FMS as to exactly WHAT significance, what effect, and what is behind the move by Todd/BBIG to purport to control and secure the iron ore of FMS, when FMS claim there is no agreement.
A "Reasonable Person" would simply not accept that there wasn't some understanding or some implicit understanding of what is behind the Todd/BBIG execution of the State Rail Agreement.

How can the ASX tolerate two classes of Ordinary shares in FMS? i.e. a group which knows what’s going on, and a group in the dark?

5 - jake002
After the last Rights Issue, didn't Todd group increase their % interest in FMS. Todd took up their full entitlement. So because not all shareholders subscribed for their entitlement, Todd's % holding increased.
Thus, if FMS again conduct a Rights Issue (which they will), then Todd may again get the ability to increase its shareholding % in FMS --- all without paying a takeover premium.
So that's an issue for the Takeovers Panel, because you have a situation where one group of shareholders is in a position of potentially having knowledge which other shareholders do not, and the majority shareholder may get the opportunity to increase its majority shareholding.