MET - Metlifecare - one for the fundies?

[winner69]

Hope there be some speculative buying today and pushing price up to $6.40 odd ...or will the market see the announcement as a big negative.

Even that’s cheap as - I hear it’s worth at least $8

[couta1]

Hope there be some speculative buying today and pushing price up to $6.40 odd ...or will the market see the announcement as a big negative.

Even that’s cheap as - I hear it’s worth at least $8

We might as well stay on the bus a bit longer winner and hope we don't get a flat tyre.

[King1212]

Wow $8....where u heard it from? Naughty Jarden's someone. Absolutely no no these days....end of career...lol

[King1212]

Another dollar will only make Met....$1.5b market cap...I think we will get another higher offer....

[winner69]

Wow $8....where u heard it from? Naughty Jarden's someone. Absolutely no no these days....end of career...lol

....no no - Mr Ellis said so yesterday when he said $6.50 wasn’t enough.

[King1212]

I know Winner. . just joking 😄

[winner69]

We might as well stay on the bus a bit longer winner and hope we don't get a flat tyre.

Agree - while punters are excited with talk of three bidders and this 8 bucks where can you go wrong.

[winner69]

I know Winner. . just joking ��

I know king - but don’t ask where I got the $6.40 I mentioned yesterday morning from (need to clean my ears I reckon)

[winner69]

For a second there I thought the bid had been announced at $6.40 lol, The barking would be fierce lol
They've done enough so no discount to NTA could be considered as being fair and reasonable.

So the answer to you question still has to be NO ...they (Met Board) haven’t done enough to get the market to recognise what MET might be worth.

Well respected Board but I think they’ve been a bit slack in this respect (been running the company operationally OKish rather than raising the profile of the company if you get what I mean)

And now we have to put our faith in thevsame Board to actually get a good price for us

[Beagle]

So the answer to you question still has to be NO ...they (Met Board) haven’t done enough to get the market to recognise what MET might be worth.

Well respected Board but I think they’ve been a bit slack in this respect (been running the company operationally OKish rather than raising the profile of the company if you get what I mean)

And now we have to put our faith in thevsame Board to actually get a good price for us

I think they could have been more proactive with the buy-back. I've said it before, buying back the companies own shares in the mid-late $4's was a complete no brainer at such a deep discount to NTA.
Maximum in any one year as I understand it is 5% so that would have been 5% x 213m shares = 10.65m shares at say an average of $5 = $53m allocated. They allocated just $30m to this process despite having a ~ $900m development pipeline over the next 3 years so yes I would agree a more proactive stance should have been taken and it shouldn't have taken shareholder activism to get them to do this.

3 Parties interested. I am quite confident someone is going to pay at least the net tangible asset backing of just over $7 (estimated at 31 December 2019).
Patience is all that's required here from shareholders. Remember the market is often a place that shifts value from the impatient, to the patient