Originally Posted by
Beagle
Non binding and indicative is language that's not new to me so I wasn't prepared to put my hand up for any. Really the question is should such a speculative attempt at a takeover ever been played out in public ? Clearly FBU directors think not, whereas STU directors took a different view, probably because they've been so "transparent" about their problems in the past, (sarcasm intended).
Not aware of any such provision in our takeovers code but not pretending to have a good knowledge of it either.
Absolutely, Balance, one must make a decision whether they want to get involved with the shenanigans of the inept and its even uglier cousin in the industry or stick to investing in quality companies where companies have a long and credible track record of doing what they say they'll do. One is trading and speculation, the other investing.
I merely comment because I find these sort of corporate fiasco's amusing and perhaps my warning yesterday about possible Cindy's Kindy political influence of Com Com gave some food for thought to those tempted to pay up at over $1.70 and saved someone's bacon ? We'll never know but I am sure you would agree it never hurts to have a robust debate from all different perspectives :)
I agree the investment bankers will be raking over the coals of this proposed deal like a school of hungry piranha's looking for their next juicy feed...but there's no guarantee whatsoever that the two ugly cousins will wed or that Com Com will give its blessing at the alter.