It's a thing called "voting" yin and in order for something to pass, the majority of votes have to be in favour of it. Allow me to illustrate:
You, me and a third person have decided to buy a tub of ice cream to share. You and the other person would like vanilla but I want chocolate. Well, we likely end up with vanilla because each of us has a 33% vote and 66% of the votes were cast in favour of vanilla. Therefore I have to wear it and have vanilla instead of chocolate.
So, in order for MW to take control of the company, he needs to get the support of 50.1% of the votes. He himself doesn't need that amount BUT he needs to get that many VOTES. Now, what appears to be happening here is that more shares are being issued to associates of the current board, which means it is getting less likely that MW will have the required 50.1% of votes to succeed in his motion. And as @shift has so correctly noted, I would not be surprised to see the associated "transactions" cancelled the day after the vote, once the additional voting power is no longer required.
Please tell me you understand this. Tell me that you understand that for something to happen, the majority of votes have to be in favour of it.
I understand that in some cultures voting isn't a widely respected institution and I could have very easily been able to get chocolate ice cream just by throwing a tanty and killing the people who voted for vanilla BUT that is not how it happens with ASX listed companies.
CDB Price at posting:
1.9¢ Sentiment: None Disclosure: Not Held
