I know it's premature to speculate at this point.But judging by...

I know it's premature to speculate at this point.

But judging by the low desperate act of deceipt (as we hear from HC contributors), I think there is a distinct possibility that the directors already know the deal will fail (given the 50%/75% rule).

Most who think this is a done deal and those who can't be bothered voting don't count (UMC's mistake is not to have included a self-addressed paid-for envelop, who is going to waste 55 cents ??).

On the contrary, those who want the directors (figuratively speaking) facing the firing squad have all put their NO vote in. The results would be overwhelming.

They would have enquired the results so far from the share registrar and got a rude shock. This is why I see a possibility that one may be tempted to tamper with the ballot. If so, this would constitute a serious crime that needs doing time !

Interference and malicious deceipt of this nature involves serious risks. The stakes are so high and they have so much to lose I think they would try anything.