Ann: Central Tanami Project, page-70

That's governance and standard. You need that for any JV deal, HOA or otherwise.

Question is why did TAM BOD enter into HOA....because it was a poor deal? HOA is entered because they considered all there deals on behalf of SH's and wanted the deal sealed. Not because they wanted SH approval which is a process they needed to follow. If the BOD thought SH approval was a reason to get out, there would have been an exchange of letters, or included a clause that said provided a better offer was not received before final contract. if the latter was the case, I just think you would have got some mud raking and throwing. That's not what we have.......Interestingly enough, just reading between the lines, if it was that clear cut that SH approval is a key get out clause, there would be zero need for NST to make their HOA conditional upon MLX HOA being terminated. It must stand for something don't you reckon, what that is no one knows, but one things for sure the BOD at the time of signing the HOA "considered various proposals" and decided MLX was the way to proceed.

We all agree NST is the better deal, good on em, but this aint as clear cut as some are saying. When the court asks the BOD in the absence of the NST deal how would you believe the shareholders would have voted, just let each of them say "we know our recommendation to proceed with MLX was never going to be accepted" I would love to see and hear how that one plays out.