Saturday, April 9, 2011

@ 32 days, 23 hours, 20 minutes, 36 seconds........

512 members have indicated 'NO" to the present proposed Merger. Of these, 442 have indicated their "NO" interest in WTG paper and 70 would consider a 1:1 offer. However, of the 512 total, only 256 have indicated their CMM holdings position comprising 80,257,912 shares.

In other words, 50 % of those investors who have indicated "NO" to the proposed merger are standing in the wings and still to be heard from.

@ 12:30 pm ADT we still have 32 days, 23 hours, 30 min., 49 sec.

I'm wondering if we're seeing the Telethon phenomenon where charity donations struggle to the objective until the last minute and then ...... WHAM !

..... the proposed merger is defeated.

At 50 % unknown, can Max Finskiy take this chance of seeing his proposed merger defeated ?

(.... and yes I do acknowledge the anomalies in my presentation.)


bigjohn37 said...

Thanks for your vigilance, FREDERICTON. One of the most significant figures here, apart from the number of NO voting shares, is that 77% of us CMM shareholders do not want anything to do with WTG. We simply do not trust Finskiy & Co. They lost all their credibility with most of us. If not Finskiy, maybe his mentor Mr Prokhorov will get the message. Good bye clear sailing for an LSE listing!

nt300 said...

Great post FREDERICTON. There are two strong issues I have with this merger among many anomalies. 1) British Virgin Islands and 2) Finskiy having 51% or more of the new company.


First of all to are correct 442/568 = 77% do not want anything to do with WTG. In my approach I primarily watch the trend of the No's which I consider to be NO + "NO"thing worse than 1:1

The other 56 in the 1.5 to 2.5:1 are equally entitled to their positions.

I believe your 77% version or my 50% version give the CMM Shareholder's Committee a strong card with which to play their magic on getting a good deal for ALL Shareholders.

to nt300.... I trust that you have conveyed your concerns (which I share also) to the Shareholder's Committee thru Sudbury Novice over at Agoracom.

Trust we're all having a good weekend.

dave peters said...

FREDERICTON already acknowledged that his analysis has anomalies so I don't mean to pick on him. But I am curious what the real numbers are.

Of course, the 77% figure is not 77% of CMM shareholders, it is 77% of those who (i) visit stockigloo and (ii) bothered to vote. (Even this ignores that some people voted twice.)

Here's just a back of the envelope calculation. If someone has more accurate numbers, please supply them. I'll use some conservative figures. I posted something similar at Agoracom.

How many shares of CMM are out there that Finskiy does not control or significantly influence (when it comes to voting)? Say, 250 million?

If we look at the stockigloo list of shareholders opposed to the merger, we have about 265 of them (some of those we know actually voted / signed the list more than once ... I'll ignore that complication because I have no way to correct for it).

Also, I ignore Fair For All's contribution because my understanding is that his share total represents an unknown (to me) number of investors, not just a single person.

Okay, so you have about 35 million shares left on the list divided by about 265 people ... so on average, each retail shareholder holds about 132,000 shares.

Divide the 250 million (non-Finskiy) share figure by 132,000 and you come up with about 1900 retail investors. Of whom, at most 569 have expressed an opinion in the stockigloo survey.

As I said, this is a back of the envelope calculation. If my 250 million count is way off, someone please correct it.

So my point is just that an awful lot of retail investors have yet to voice or vote their opinion in any public forum. We can guess how they feel, but let us be honest and admit that it is a guess.

I do not mean to come across as negative, I am just trying to be realistic and factual.

NSX001 said...

dave peters!

I tend to agree that the numbers are somewhat inconclusive,and cannot be confirmed, but we have to feel that there are others out there that feel the same as us and we mean to make this takeover very costly for WTG.

I'm more concerned that even though the number of "no" voters increases daily, the total number of dedicated shares dissenting has not increased.significantly.

maria said...

Guys, I don't know if I'm the only one or not but I'm confused.
That list was compiled under the title "Dissent voters" which was explained to me as meaning someone who would abstain from voting. If shareholders would, especially in great numbers, file dissent notices then those shareholders, if the merger went through, would have a shot at fighting for a "fair" value for their shares.
Now that title has changed and instead of "dissent voters" it says "NO" vote.
Besides the people who signed up twice or even more and, who knows, people who added their names just to deceive--to give a false sense of security(so that we get screwed at the end), also there's the question how do we know the people who signed as "Dissenters" are now "NO" voters?


Maria..... "Dissent" was the word that was initially used to express our dissatisfaction. It was pointed out by those in the know that 'Dissent" legally meant those who would give up their shares to a judicial decision as to what they were worth... with no voting rights, nothing except the Judge's decision.... which could be anything.
Carib, the blog leader recently changed the title to indicate what we had all intended in the first place without legal remifications. The share holding indications were those people who were dissatified with the proposed merger and a Shareholder's Committee was formed.

It is a guidance as to support to the CMM Shareholder's Committee along with the Survey vote as they work to secure a better offer for All shareholders..... whatever it will be, they have my confidence in their abilities and trust. What they need also is our patience.

With reference to the Survey and the holdings list, Carib and Relic are continually monitoring authenticity of the entries and they have a very good track record in this regard. As to people who change their minds, the Survey does allow for changing your vote.

I can tell you by the numbers that I have yet to see anyone change their vote except to be more adamant in their displeasure.

There is a procedure in the holdings list where members can increase or decrease their holdings. One member has withdrawn but the most usual is for members to increase their holdings (including me)

I trust this outline waylays some of your concerns