yes, it sure is curious.what these guys usually do is claim the...

yes, it sure is curious.

what these guys usually do is claim the protection of "Chinese Walls".
So in the Sub s/h Notice the two biggest parcels are held by UBS AG Aust Branch, and the other by UBS Securities Aust Ltd.
The UBS Sec Aust Ltd holding is held as Beneficial Owner. So UBS Aust owns those shares in its own right I think. So when it trades, it can claim that it is trading independently, and with no knowledge, of what UBS AG is doing, when UBS AG is acting for MOS. Thats the "Chinese Wall."

On the other hand, the holding of UBS AG Aust Branch is notified because UBS AG Aust branch has a "relevant interest" in those 33.9m shares, because UBS AG Aust has a Prime Broking agreement with a client.
Under that P/B agreement it seems to me that UBS AG can do anything with those 33.9m MOS shares.
I have to admit I am not familiar with the functioning and ramifications of P/B agreements. It seems that the Owner of the shares (called Custodian i think) provides the MOS shares, (and there may be margin monies in there as well), and then UBS AG can trade those MOS shares however it likes.

I see that the Advisor to MOS is also UBS AG Aust Branch.

So i agree with you Gobris, it is very strange.

May i suggest you email MOS, Sally Highducheck, [email protected] and ask those questions.

All your queries seem very valid to me. S/h need to have those answers before we vote.
I cannot see how the Aust Branch can claim Chinese walls, I know ASIC has had real concerns with this sort of behaviour wrt to other takeovers.

I would be greatful if you could let us know of the response you receive.

I have no incentive now to chase it up, as I have only a token holding left in MOS.

cheers