RE: RE: RE: correction re: impression RE: Summary The NV shares were only created to allow foreign buyers buy up equity around the retarted Canadian foreign ownership rules. This is now a moot point as no foreign buyer would be able to acquire controlling interest without a bonafide takeover offer.
The dual-share structure is a dinosour and must be collaposed. When the shares were split, it was 1:1. The re-marriage should also be 1:1. Regardless of what the prevailing trading price is/was. Voting share holders are loosing nothing. In any acquisition of TELUS both shares classes must be treated equally - it is in the companies constitution.
If it were so obvious that VOTING shareholders were loosing out, Mason wouldn't have to do anything. The market forces would dictate an AGAINST vote. However, that is evidently NOT that case. The MAJORITY of VOTING shareholders, minus Mason, will vote FOR. Doesn't that tell you something? Or, are you smarter than all the fund managers that actually hold significant interest in TELUS voting shares?
How come not one other MAJOR voting shareholder has come out in support of MASON? (Sorry, you don't count, robvanhooren, unless you have a million or so shares).