Worsel, You posted this : "So it's the directors duty to act in...

Worsel,

You posted this :
"So it's the directors duty to act in good faith for the benefit of the company and not have regard for outside interests. ....And regards acting in good faith the law takes the view that good faith must not only be done, but it must be MANIFESTLY SEEN TO BE DONE. So does this scenario constitute a manifest effort to act in the interest of the company as a whole? A company manifestly undervalued by the market - a robustly profitable company with no debt and liquid assets held that are significantly greater than the market cap. A proposed deal that will see existing shareholders diluted to extinction and control of the undervalued entity passing to parties related to the directors. The pricing of the proposed deal is based on the manifestly undervalued share price With NO effort made by directors to educate the market as to the true worth of the company and it's assets. A refusal by directors to communicate with concerned shareholders to clarify information. A very lightly traded stock capped by large sell orders - very few shareholders having holdings the size of the block trades. Who benefits? To me, I'd say it doesn't satisfy the test. I'd be interested to hear what others think."

Are these your thoughts, or are they statements from some transcript anywhere?

Regards