Ann: Company Update, page-32

MLX trying to bully share holders into their deal, the more they do this the less I like them.

As far as I can see as long as Tanami present the MLX deal first at the share holders meeting Re both deals, and the MLX deal is rejected by share holders in favour of NST, clause 8 comes into play and all conditions were met in full for both deals.

SHARE HOLDER APROVAL IS REQUIRED and we are one such third party under clause 8, that needs to ratify the deal or not.

The remaining beef MLX "claim" (I would like to see proof) is that TAM Board advised share holders how to vote????

I can tell you I got not such advice as a share holder, and can only see the directors advising how they intend to vote in a company release.

However regardless the boards whole legal mandate is to make money for the share holders, not give it to a predator.

MLX where are you coming from????????????

You are putting share holders off side and you are definitely not winning the war for the hearts and minds of share holders.

I have a feeling legally that trying to use financial cost as a weapon to get your way is not a legal avenue that one is allowed to push? so it may come back and bight you on the ass.

You had better over bid MLX , as you have soured my taste for your style of doing business and an = bid wont cut it now having chosen this rout.