ivanhoe statement, page-38

"these statements do not necessarily reflect the views and conclusions of Mr Reeve"

If we consider this statement, I conclude by thinking "who cares what Mr Reeve thinks? He is only acting on behalf of IVA, not all the shareholders of EXS.

Their arguement that they are seeking the return of all net proceeds of the sale hardly stacks up as valid.

The difference between the $100m proposed to be returned to shareholders and the net proceeds (for this conversation, let's assume that the tax bill is 25m) of $150m is $50m. IVA's 22.8% share would be $11.4m. Is a billion dollar company really arguing about $11m? Or are they just trying to come out with some bluster for another reason? Does Peter have to be seen to be saying something? Is "the irrational one" breathing down his neck?