Is it plausible and reflective of a fair value though? I think...

Is it plausible and reflective of a fair value though?

I think the IER is ridiculously conservative and we are being conditioned to think that anything above 27c is a great outcome. We are being conditioned to think we are getting a great deal cause we have got Pfizer up from 11.5c, then 14.6c, currently 20.8c and hopefully 27c.

In reality I think it is the opposite to this.

@Taurean7's excellent analysis was in the order of $1.76 per share. @poorinvestor (I think it was you) has demonstrated that by applying different metrics to the assumptions used in ResAppDx's valuation (more in line with the supporting information quoted in the IER) you get valuations well in excess of the IER's valuations, and I can't find any way that the IERs assertion that multiple years of revenue out to 2040/41 were included in ResAppDx's valuation.

There have also been many others in the threads over the past few months who have also highlighted that we aren't getting the true valuation of RAP.

Until we do, I'll be a No voter, no matter how convoluted the voting wording is.