Well, it wasn't just because the two BOD members turned the deal down.
1) Why was there an "accepted" deal in the first place? Shouldn't the the BOD need to commit to the acceptance?
2) In the voting, why were shares not voted or shares which were placed with the BOD (because of the way the on-line voting was conducted) -- all treated as "non-approval"?
3)Why was it not made clear to everyone what the circumstances were beforehand and to ensure that the voting process was clear to all?
4) How many of the 85% were merely non-voters (or misguidingly voted with the BOD on the on-line voting) as opposed to those clearly against?
It took more than a day to canvass the results, but even the results were not clear. Was was the subtotal for each category of voting? Abstain, for, and against???
Why is it that another election cannot even talked about as a possibility?
Zig very soon needs to clarify very clearly why the stock is worth more than $3,12 if two BOD members turned the £3.12 buyout down.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
