RE:RE:"Shareholders Lose Opportunity"nedstar71 wrote: As I said, not all that bright. I think at this point egos have taken over. They're now stuck with a huge position in a company that isn't what they originally wanted, and are unwilling to pay up what it would take to buy it entirely. I don't get the impression their AGM moves will amount to anything this year either. At 28-30% they already own all the pro Mithaq shares and without Mittlemans etc the current board is much less controversial. They'll likely garner enough votes to keep power imo.
Unfortunately it looks like there won't be a timely resolution to this mess.
Results from last AGM can be seen here:
https://services.cds.ca/docs_csn/03521541-00000001-00027127-y%40%23filings%23livework%23wkout%2371557%23aimia_VR-PDF.pdf
I think there were roughly 84m shares outstanding at the time, so just under 60% of shares were voted. If engagement remains similar this year, then Mithaq shouldn't be able to wrest control, as there are now an additional 10m PP shares presumably in favour of current BOD. Mithaq's ownership has increased from 19.9% then to 28.4% now, but presumably many of the shares they purchased were from NO-voters.
Of course, engagement levels might change drastically from last year. The tender surely caught some people's attention. Aimia's communication has been horrid IMO. If Q4 numbers are bad and they don't do something to control the narrative & seed some trust then I think they should be very concerned about losing control. Staying silent/opaque or professing boundless but unsupported optimism won't be a good look. It seems quite unlikely that they'll get the relief sought from the Capital Markets Tribunal, so I hope/pray they're not relying on it. I'm also assuming the PP investors won't exercise their out-of-money warrants to further block Mithaq, but I guess that's a possibility if they're true believers.
FWIW I agree with some of Mithaq's points, I just don't trust them in a control position. G&A has been way too high and I don't see the need for 8 people on the BOD of a holding company with such a small array of assets. Management would do well to address these valid concerns rather than simply crying foul over OSC violations.
Rant over.