Dynofish,
I mostly agree with your analysis, but with one exception.
I do not think ALB in the wings was in any way propping up our share price. In fact, many of us were surprised they stuck their head up last week to remind the world they were still 'live'. As many have speculated, someone has been manipulating down our share price, rather than propping it up, for many months.
I firmly believe that the KV progress, the stunning photography and the consistent progress should all have been steadily building our price. I have also speculated we are ahead of schedule, and management has been 'sandbagging' with confusing references to 'production in mid 2024', when in fact commissioning should commence pre Xmas! I also firmly believe that our quality resource, simplified flowsheet, learnings from others, as well as involvement of people like Lycopodium, stand us in great stead to avoid some of the commissioning problems encountered by others.
Entry into ASX100 should have given us another kick up, but I think that may have been the catalyst for announcing this deal, as ALB were probably serious about a 'final' bid at $3, and our Board would have been unable to 'accept' that bid, if the market price went over $3.
So, my slightly different rationale/hope is that our Board wants simply to use the mechanism of a highly credible IER, to show the world LTR's 'fair value'. As I speculated on the other thread, the Board probably has already engaged with a likely 'expert', and has a feel for that value, particularly as at around Xmas. I would hope the Alita bid may also cause a $4-500 million Buldania value to now come into play in any such 'fair value.
I note others have suggested an 'expert' will simply read the room and endorse an agreed price, but that is not my (only) experience, if their engagement is clearly unfettered. Of course, that may result in a 'no deal', but maybe that is the point.
Yes, it is possible the IER might endorse $3 as fair, which would show that many of us are romantic outliers, though not necessarily wrong. In that scenario, I would feel for Directors' fiduciary obligations, and may even vote in support (probably not!).
All shareholders, and particularly our new institutions, will have the benefit of an extensive and hopefully rigorous iER, which should educate market pricing, and also maybe a third party is encouraged to step up to the plate.
However, that is the best scenario I can come up with, with my glass half full optimism.
The alternative worry is that the Board got wobbly with their fiduciary obligations and perceived execution risk in the face of a $3 offer. Of course, UBS wants a fee, and this sadly may have been a factor, and I note management can sometimes become quite conflicted as to financial incentives, when a transaction is proposed. For TG though, a seemingly taxable transaction, makes little sense to me.
Am sitting a little on the fence tonight (Europe) on this one, which is why I have noted I would be very keen to see a PLS scrip bid @$3.25. This would build a national champion, paying franked dividends immediately, and avoid CGT for those affected. I really want to ride KV home, and happy to share that with others, including PLS holders.
Expand
(20min delay)