The point is that if there is someone out there buying big, it would only stafle someone's ideas of doing a counterbid. For, if there was one, they would have to contend with the Management's percentage holdings, plus the ones that is accumulating.
And, don't forget that, here we have a SoA on the table, NOT A T/O offer. And I have never seen a takeover coming in against a SoA before. I don't know if you have, but I never have seen one before.
Reason being that with a SoA there always is a recommendation by the Board that the Scheme be accepted, with all their backings/recommendations, and a T/O would practically have to be Hostile in order to be effective. And if someone was going to take that step and proceed with the Hostile T/O, the BOW Board has to give notice to Arrow first in order that they are offered/given the opportunity to match that offer.
Then with a SoA the bidding company only needs 50% plus one vote that represent not less than 75% of those votes of the proxies to get it legally enforceable, while with an hostile T/O, the bidding company would need to reach at least 90% of the total shares on issue to force "Compulsory Acquisition".
That on it's own is a big deterrent considering that the Board is against them.
Now, who would go to that extent and incur huge costs in the process, if all the odds are stacked against them from the beginning, lol.
I honestly think that we have been sold short by our Board, and IMO the Management would probably all end up having a job with Arrow/Shell, while we have been left holding the baby.
What I am agreeying 100% with, is what Sludge wrote. And that is to vote NO for the re-election of the two Directors coming up for re-election.
Regards.
BOW Price at posting:
$1.49 Sentiment: LT Buy Disclosure: Held
