I just keep thinking to myself about the title of this Financial...

I just keep thinking to myself about the title of this Financial Review article, " The Fight for Flinders Mines...".

In my personal opinion, these words highlight a significant reality in the mindset of many observers but possibly more stark than this is the question of how can a listed company be "fighting" in this manner at all given ALL shareholders best interests must be priority for our BOD?

Has the wider community watching things made up it's mind as to exactly what is happening here? If so, what are the consequences if ASIC was to weight in and find that minority shareholders were being deliberately and strategically oppressed for an outcome which would benefit a single shareholder - in my opinion?

I have always held the personal view that communication breakdown leads to uncertainty and disruption, plus it is very difficulty to turn things around based on the lack of trust which can be built up over these periods of time.

I still do not understand the benefits of delisting for my investment in FMS and have only been advised of the very significant dangers which my investment could face if this was to occur. I would love to understand what the intentions of Todd are with regards to BBIG and FMS and I would love to understand what deal will eventuate that will see my share value realised. I don't understand how FMS can borrow millions on one hand, but present an argument to delist which contains reference to the costs of remaining listed as a factor?

Imagine if our Board announced a deal with BBIG was done which saw the development to go ahead, albeit sometime in the future, and this deal would see something like a simple royalty/mine gate toll per tonne for FMS shareholders? How would our share price react and how we investors respond?

Is it this simple? So, why does "The Fight for Flinders Mines......" continue?