Ann: Compulsory Acquistion Notice and IER, page-64

No it doesn't.

I repeat the first line of my last post to you,

Income has no bearing on the value determined in the IER. It's measured on the value of assets.

Your statement about the IE relying solely on (or just using) cash on hand as at June 30 is factually incorrect (see the attached screenshots).

There goes 3 months of the 6 months of extra income you wanted!

IER's are not free, someone has to pay for them. And I don't see a judge requesting another being produced just because minority shareholders are up in arms about the offer price.

It is the Bidders responsibility to prove to the Court the offer is fair and reasonable (as per the screenshot I attached yesterday, straight from the ASIC website). The most recent IER says the offer price is fair and reasonable.

Everyone has the right to object, and I would be doing so if I thought there was a reasonable chance of achieving more than $1.35.
I don't want to be sitting here in 3-5 months time thinking I wish I had of accepted the IER2 valuation and done something else because there was no financial benefit to me in objecting.

I'm taking a break from here.

I hope you all consider all of the factors and options when making a decision on whether to object or not.