I am wasting my time talking to you and asking you something to support your arguments and you come up with nothing in return.
May I suggest that you go and have another read at my post and this time a proper read, and then, if you wish come back.
This is what you wrote:
""No Buddy, CP wanted a FAR better deal than you are slamming Cottee for above ... haven't you been listening ??
Palmer wanted 130 million shares for 8c a share. That's an outlay of $10.4M and represents 10% of the issued capital ... and apparently what his injunction is all about.""
And I replied:
Assuming that you are correct and assuming that Palmer was wanting those 130mill shares at 8 cents per share, what did the Board end up doing??
They've issued those same amount of shares to some sophisticates at 8.5 cents per share. BUT, don't you forget that they are also getting 65mill. oppies on the side. And please take also notice that, If they are not getting those 65 mill. oppies, they are to get back one (1), yes 1 cent per share, thus only having to pay 7.5 cents per share.
End of quote.
So, to start with I've said, Assuming that you are correct in what you are saying, and then I finished with that if they will not get their options voted at the meeting, we will have to pay back to them $650k as a penalty with the end result that the offer of CP was far superior than the one the Board opted for.
Was anything wrong in saying that? The facts are there in front of us and in black and white. Either way, IMO the Board has not acted for the general benefit of the shareholders when they have issued shares to a third party at a cheaper rate than someone else was prepared to pay for.
As for the voting of the options, we are faced with a two edged sword. Either way we will be shafted. Hence why IMO CP's offer was much superior than the one taken up by the Board.
On the one hand, according to what you've said, CP was going to pay 8 cents per share and it would have amounted to $10.4 mill dollars. On the other hand we have the 130 mill shares issued to Pattos and it's sophisticates issued at 8.5 cents $11.050.000 dollars. Now from that amount received from the issue to Pattos, we have to have the costs of issue taken out of it, plus the options of course. And, if the options are not voted for, then we will have to refund $650k dollars back to Pattos and it's clients.
Would we have been better off with the Clive Palmer deal, or with the Pattos deal?? It is obvious that you understand mathematics fairly well, so you should soon realise where I am coming from.
Finally, for the Accounting side of things, you are the one that suggested to me in the first place to go and have a good read at the Accrual Acconting before passing any comments. It wasn't me that started that part. I would never say that to anyone simply because I wouldn't know what their qualifications are. Yet you decided to do so and bur up when someone else challenges you in return. Professional men do not act in that way.
This is the end for me in regard tonthis silly comments as they are not worth the wasted space in HC pixels.
All I am asking of you is to be more fairer in you comments and stop playing the man when you should concentrate on playing the ball. That's not much to ask.
I can only say that after many years of posting in HC I have no one on ignore, and I am very proud of that. But, you, along with a few others which are excelling at insulting and doing personal attacks on a poster, (and which I am of the belief that they are still of a shool age in the ways they act), have been getting close to be the first ones on the ignore list facility.
Good night.
CTP Price at posting:
45.0¢ Sentiment: Hold Disclosure: Held
