TAKEOVER

SOA was decisively defeated by ongoing shareholders working together for their common goal despite counter productive dynamics in the process. Expectations historical record of SOA's being accepted by compliant shareholders would repeat were dramatically disrupted. The vote not only repudiated the SOA it also confirmed the problematic relationship between M.D., Chair,Board and ongoing shareholders. Those relationship dynamics remain in place. Votes against SOA may well have been significantly higher had issues of legitimacy, independence, disclosures, activist skill, flexibility, co-operation been operating free of clumsiness, egos, territoriality. 1. Chair, M.D.,Board long silence before Board recommended SOA revealed, disrupted communication, discussion, understanding, insight, for shareholders ; 2. after SOA endorsed by Board their refusal to say anything other than market the Scheme was disruptive, unhelpful, and raised questions about M.D., Chair,Board's relationship with and legal obligations to shareholders. 3. CPSA's relationship with CTP was uncertain, its role unclear, then ambiguous, then independent of CTP, then in associaton with Option Co., and hostile to New Direction ; 4. CPSA's limited, irregular, elementary, communication ineffective ; 5. Option Co's board candidates, publicised and endorsed by CPSA, with exception of Chair, were not credible ; 6. CPSA refused to dialogue, negotiate,combine with New Direction to potentially maximise SOA opposition effectiveness ; 7. N.D. had credible board candidates undermined by inclusion of a controversial person ; 8. N.D. were informed of objections to the candidate and ignored the feedback ( why would shareholders vote to replace an unresponsive Board with another unresponsive board ? ) ; 9. N.D offered to dialogue, negotiate, co-operate with Option Co., were rebuffed, and then behaved passively counter-productively. Macquarie's on-market buying, CTP's capital issue to Brokers customers,Right Issue,trapped squeeze players, pivot traders activity will make defeating the next low-ball offer take-over offer more complex. Learning from SOA experience must be done and integrated into ongoing shareholder and activist thinking, planning, behaviour. Bids will happen without notice, events will develop quickly, and in the absence of SOA lessons being integrated mistakes will be repeated and exploited. ( I am interested to read other ongoing shareholders analysis of SOA experience ).