What is always most lacking is the question "why?"....
Why would a "shareholder" of either be "against" an action which creates immeasurably more value. (3-6x reasonable, the market activities as of the last 6 months dictating 4 x a reasonable figure).....
What would be gained, and who would benefit from the above vastly greater value not being established?..
The question(s) is always why, who benefits, and what is gained?
At a time in the industry (and market), when consolidated holdings are fetching larger and larger prices, who would benefit from doing everything possible to prevent such?
It is certainly not "shareholders" who seek greater profits, value, footprints.
One can take a simple glance at either board to easily and quickly see the post list and comments..
A large portion of my day to day professional duties lay in the areas of "PsyOps"..so anything and everything is usually fairly simple to see, especially when implementation and execution is so poorly done lol...
We see quite a few rushing to grasp (and provide, post after post) deliberately misleading information to support their argument(s) as to why any activity creating immeasurably greater value isn't desired...
One will also note the absence of the very same...(avoiding any and all discussion of the final product of the action) Odd how hundreds (upon hundreds) of posts by those opposed fail to address the actual results...
One will note the abundance of posts by those who have clearly stated holding no interests in either.
So the question is:
Who would desire to avoid a greater collection of holdings, for a substantially greater value?
The other question being who would dedicate time, effort, and expense to preventing such? The answer to all is certainly not shareholders wishing a greater return...
Hundreds upon hundreds of posts.....yet none addressing the recent activities of the market, the valuation of such holdings...
It's too personal to be business.
