I feel it is important to give some air time to a YES vote. At this stage there haven’t been many Yes voters willing to state their position publicly, but I think we need to consider the full repercussions of not voting YES.
I’d just like to ask all you pushing for a NO vote… What do you hope toachieve?? I can see only 3 objectives achieved by a No vote:
1. You will have shoved it to Hartree and basically told them to get stuffed.
2. You will have sent the company into Voluntary Administration,and basically preclude any of us from salvaging a single cent from ourinvestment.
3. You will have cut your nose off to spite yourself, as Hartree willprobably then be able to step in as the only major creditor and negotiate a fulltakeover of MYL for next to nothing, without any compensation to shareholders.
As mentioned in another thread, we’ve been dealt a pretty sh***ty handof cards, but we’ve got to deal with what’s on the table, not what we wishcould happen, or what we wish Hartree and the MYL Management should have done. Our main objective should now be to salvage as much from our investmentas we possibly can, and I truly don’t believe voting No does that. Ithink it does the opposite, it screws us.
It would have been much more effective if the Chairman Mr. Moore hadintegrated the contents of today’s Update into the AGM documents and into thedetailed explanation of the Resolution we need to vote on. It finally demonstrates some consideration for the interests of shareholders, and emphasises the intention of Hartree in good faith to seek a re-listing as soon as possible. I hope it did not come too late to convince the No voters to change their mind as there are no other options available to save the company.
Yes, today’s update did seem like a “vote yes, or else", letter;but it also seemed to me like a final plea, maybe even a desperate plea, to shareholders to come to their senses! THERE IS NO OTHER ALTERNATIVE! If there were, it would have been presented. The company has been trying to find alternative finance opportunities for a year now to get through this disaster but there is none. There is only Hartree.
I think Hartreewill have a big incentive to relist as that will be the easiest way for them toaccess the market for further expansion capital if required. Most of thepaperwork for relisting is done, so it would not take much to update thedocuments and refile for a listing. It’s in their interest to re-list,as it’s a much cleaner option than having to go through an drawn-out legalprocess to buy out a company in Administration.
Maybe I'm missing something, but it seems virtually every one wanting tovote No, wants to do it out of spite to Hartree! Or because they feel Hartree or the Management did not strike an equitable financing arrangement. I don’t think basing an investment decision on spite or revenge, that is ultimately going to cost you tens of thousands of dollars, demonstrates sound business judgement. All it does is lose us our investment.
So tin summary, I am convinced that ouronly viable option is to vote YES in order to keep the company afloat and giveshareholders half a chance to recoup most, and eventually all, of theirinvestment. I agree with the decision of Independent Consultant’s Report - Theoffer is not fair, but it is reasonable. And it’s our ONLY offer and our ONLY chance to salvage our investment.
