Not a total waste of time Jake. One of the reasons the ASX might...

Not a total waste of time Jake.

One of the reasons the ASX might use its discretion to insist on a shareholder vote under 11.1.2 of the listing rules would be if it was seen that MEL was acquiring a new main undertaking i.e. EOR in the US and abandoning its current main undertaking i.e. the Clarence Moreton Basin, even though ELK may be seen to be in a business of the same nature as MEL e.g. oil and gas development.

So to avoid any chance that the ASX would use its discretion to insist on a shareholder vote it is very important for MEL and its advisors to continue insisting that it is not in any way moving away from the Clarence Moreton.

If there was any suggestion that the March funding mentioned by MEL was a settlement with the NSW Government to relinquish its existing PELs in the CMB it would be very hard for MEL to maintain this story.

See 3.2(4) of Guidance Note 12 below: -
"where the entity has previously disposed of or abandoned its main undertaking and it is proposing to acquire a business, or to make a series of acquisitions of businesses, that will become its new main undertaking (this applies whether its new main undertaking is of the same nature as, or a different nature to, its former main undertaking)."

So to avoid any chance of the ASX using its discretion expect to see a lot of statements from MEL and its advisors that it is not abandoning the CMB but that it has just been frustrated at every turn.