Ann: Becoming a substantial holder, page-11

Interesting point actually (mathematically I don't think you would maintain the same percentage as it wasn't a 1:1 issue, being that it was 1:5 then on a fully diluted basis it would change - in VE's case it should have their fully diluted holdings down to around 4.5% - which wouldn't normally trigger a substantial shareholder notice, unless ...)

On the 16th June VE announced they were 'ceasing to be substantial shareholder', that is they held less than 5% of a company on or after that date. For the first time since that date, on the 15th September they lodged a "Becoming a substantial holder" notice because they believed they held revenant interest over 5%, but their underlying FPO's remain at 4.85% of the voting stock on an non-diluted basis (i.e. below 5%). So it seem they have considered the options as the securities that pushed them over the 5%.


Note - this is they way I read it, others may read it different and I could have missed something.