Muss,Your own quote tells the story doesn't it. You quoted:"(a)...

Muss,

Your own quote tells the story doesn't it. You quoted:

"(a) the holders of securities in that class (if any) who have objected to the acquisition between them hold less than 10% by value of those remaining securities at the end of the objection period set out in the notice under paragraph 664C(1)(b);"

Note the "10% by value of those remaining securities" bit. Its specifically talking about remaining securities associated with those that object. Its not talking about the total securities of the class or surely they wouldn't have said "remaining securities" would they ?

We have an experts report which states that the fair value is higher. Directors opinion is worth squat. They are seen to be neither experts nor independant thus why they needed to get an experts report.

Minor wants our shares and we will object. They can either offer us more or spend money arguing it in court. Seems simple.

I might also say that the value in the experts report was infuenced by the risks associated with funding and that the banks could pull the plug. As Minor now have 90+% this is no longer a valid risk. The valuation is surely higher now than when the report was commissioned.