Normal
ajj,I guess one of the problems for GTP and its Board was the share price was not so low when they originally made the proposal. The last quarter of 2008 was not a great time for almost any company listed on a stock exchange, well run or otherwise.Ajj, if the share price was lower, then there would be just more dilution. But 70% is already a fair bit.Similarly, if the proposal could turn GTP around, at $0.17, it may not take a huge amount of additional money by each MIS investors to buy out many of the remaining shares.The question I would like to know is, did the majority of MIS voters that voted "NO", vote that way thinking GTP may fall over and they will need to harvest their own trees, or they just thought the offer was not fair without being sure what actually is fair in today's economic environment? Let's think what the RBA thought about the economy only say 6 months ago.Did those that voted "NO" have any view on next year's or the following year's timber market price? If so, how did they form their view? Do those that voted "NO" just assume someone will harvest their trees in the future and distribute the value they think their trees are worth?Do those that voted "NO" actually care how much their trees are worth?Seriously, I think if the "NO" vote wins, a Growers representative group needs to be established and they should commence discussions with GTP regarding the future management of the trees.Guff, I have declared I have shares. I have also seen the aftermath for MIS investors when managers fail.
ajj,
I guess one of the problems for GTP and its Board was the share price was not so low when they originally made the proposal. The last quarter of 2008 was not a great time for almost any company listed on a stock exchange, well run or otherwise.
Ajj, if the share price was lower, then there would be just more dilution. But 70% is already a fair bit.
Similarly, if the proposal could turn GTP around, at $0.17, it may not take a huge amount of additional money by each MIS investors to buy out many of the remaining shares.
The question I would like to know is, did the majority of MIS voters that voted "NO", vote that way thinking GTP may fall over and they will need to harvest their own trees, or they just thought the offer was not fair without being sure what actually is fair in today's economic environment? Let's think what the RBA thought about the economy only say 6 months ago.
Did those that voted "NO" have any view on next year's or the following year's timber market price? If so, how did they form their view? Do those that voted "NO" just assume someone will harvest their trees in the future and distribute the value they think their trees are worth?
Do those that voted "NO" actually care how much their trees are worth?
Seriously, I think if the "NO" vote wins, a Growers representative group needs to be established and they should commence discussions with GTP regarding the future management of the trees.
Guff, I have declared I have shares. I have also seen the aftermath for MIS investors when managers fail.
Hello and welcome to Aussie Stock Forums!
To gain full access you must register. Registration is free and takes only a few seconds to complete.
Already a member? Log in here.
