“If Senegal did not approve of WPL they would have objected to the transaction in writing within the time period prescribed and prevented the deal completion.”
Beg to disagree STH.
On what grounds would the Govt have had to object? They can’t just say, sorry we don’t like the “cut of your jib, bugger off”.
Further, as been said numerous times before, there was no deal to wave through as it was in dispute. This is the “deemed approval” argument that some seem to advocate. I don’t agree with this argument, firstly, “approval by omission “, doesn’t seem to be normal practice, secondly, if there was deemed approval what would be the rationale for the “participating “, arete. I believe this is straw that WPL proponents clutch to. It appears that FAR wasn’t provided sufficient information to either PE or buy the holding company. The “A4” page comment! If the PE notice gave a PE value/price then it is likely that it lacked the methodology to accompany it. I don’t believe the just “trust me” line constitutes a complaint notice. If it was an offer to buy the company then, the offer was to buy it, sight unseen. Hence Cath’s comment. “Who would.....”. Either way not transparent, with COP openly citing “confidentiality “. Either way, it’s denying FAR it’s rights. FAR sought more information. I don’t disagree that it is well possible that there was confusion initially as to how the PE process worked. That is, uplifting the JV assets or buying the holding company. I only say this as Cath’s comment seems at odds with the process as we now understand it. Notwithstanding it could have just been a a throw away line as well to simplify things. After all how many of us understood PE at the time. I’ve certainly learnt a lot from this forum on this subject. Either way the point is moot. It seems clear that FAR wasn’t afforded the opportunity to do either. It is further moot as, irrespective of what FAR thought, it was encumbrant on COP to issue a complaint notice. That they now deny that PE rights ever existed after at first stating that the did and issuing a notice, is tacit acknowledgement to me that their notice wasn’t compliant. All this has been said numerous times and whatever our personal views they matter little. But I do give FAR greater odds than most on this forum of being afforded “D relief “. I guess it is in line with my sense of “fair play” as well, believing that FAR has been wronged. However this would also be at odds with experience in a world where bullies do prosper, contrary to common wisdom.
As Whiskey said, the thee amigos will decide.
How did I allow myself to start posting again! Must have to much time on my hands! No just fascinated, wouldn’t miss it for quids. GLTA
FAR Price at posting:
6.2¢ Sentiment: None Disclosure: Held
(20min delay)
