dioro directors, page-6

I am fully reading this target statement at every detail of it.

The independent directors have not spell out that is a bad thing for RMS-DIO to merge.

All they have said for their reasons for us to reject is:
1. DIO has better gold assets than RMS (well doh, its obvious).
2. Mainly they are telling to reject the offer is because they think the merger is unlikely to be successfully due to AVO's 44.8% holding (and unwillingness to accept RMS).
3. There is no capital gains tax relief in an event of the merger not being successful.

From front to back, they have not spelled out that RMS is a bad company to merge with (whereas, they continually reminded us AVO's offer was bad).

So my view is WE SHOULD ACCEPT RMS'offers (ratherless of the board's lack of endorsement), why?
1. The more chances RMS has close to 50% or more of RMS, the greater the chance AVO might reconsider its stance on the RMS-DIO merger.
2. We can become shareholders of RMS (a prospective growth company in gold, with high quality gold assets and tip to reach production like DIO is).
3. We become sharesholders of RMS, because we are not happy with our board's decision in creating wealth for the company and value for us shareholders.
4. We can sell RMS shares at a higher price