after re-reading, i agree with you guys. commercialising the...

after re-reading, i agree with you guys. commercialising the direct interest, not commercialising the asset.

however i think that the clarification is in the report to highlight that the rights apply only if they sell the permit themselves, NOT if they were to sell themselves to someone else, i.e. accept a takeover offer.

Because otherwise, the IES rights would be a bit of a poison pill to a takeover. A potential suitor might think: "Sure, I can take 40% of Pandora + onshore for [$5M CMT mcap + premium], but if I have to then pay IES multiples of that, then i'm not interested"

I think Cott are trying to make it clear that that's not the case.

What do you guys think of my new interpretation? Maybe i'm just dreaming