RE:RE:RE:how do you explain.....SolutionFinder wrote: Quakes, you're joking, right? The NO voters posting on this board are in control of the share price? I would say it is because of our own management (Dev & Ross to be precise). Proposing such a nonsensical takeover/merger ahead of FCU's and DML's PEA and FCU's updated numbers is simply idiotic and an insult to long term shareholders.
Therefore let's do the following:
- FCU shareholders vote NO and reject DML's low-ball offer
- FCU keeps on drilling
- In spring 2016 DML (if the company still exists by then) can make a new and more reasonable offer.
There is really no need to push this takeover/merger. PLS will only get bigger and bigger and better and better until a new offer and better is on the table. It's as simple as that.
Maybe DML is afraid of being delisted from the NYSE because it has been losing value for years. Of course, a deposit like PLS could save them.
quakes99 wrote:
That's easy, bull_man. Just read the steady stream of posts by Bashers dressed up as No voters. Doesn't take a genius to know that investors want maximum reward at the lowest risk.. and the bashing community are focused on discrediting management and bashing the company, as bashers always do. They are raising the risk profile and driving investors away. Simple as that. No new investors = falling share price. Law of supply and demand. Posters who are legitimate No Voters like you, bull_man, don't seem to understand the game that the bashers are playing, and how it is hurting the No campaign, and making it harder for the Undecideds to vote No. The decision on whether or not to approve the proposed merger is much like any other investment decision - weigh the risks and the potential rewards. A lower Fission share price raises the possible rewards, but significantly raises the risk that those rewards will never be attained. A higher Fission share price reduces the potential rewards but significantly reduces the risk that those rewards will not be attained. So, when FCU trades lower the risk outweights the rewards... so shareholders will more likely vote with Management to delay the sale of PLS until U prices rebound and try to capture that upside later rather than stand alone and vulnerable to a predatory takeover here at the bottom of the U market. IF FCU trades higher then the rewards begin to outweigh the risks... even if a predator attempts a takeover it will be at a higher starting price and the chances of a bidding war are higher, given that the market is assigning a higher value to the company and its shares, making it more attractive to both investors and acquirers, imho. I believe it's possible for the NO vote to succeed if it is truly focused on the metrics of the deal, showing the potential upside and drawing in new investors to push up the share price. But if it continues to simply follow the basher's philosophy of defaming and discrediting management then the No vote will fail to materialize... and the bashers will have succeeded in accomplishing their own goal of a lower FCU share price. Just my own opinion... Cheers and good luck! bull_man wrote: a 75 cents value to FCU after a surprisingly amazing maiden resource estimate, continued highly successful drilling programs (winter & summer), japan restarts on the way, a spectacular and "conservative" PEA, a world-wide supply deficiency coming in 4-5 years??? oh i know, a ridiculous merger arrangement.
Read more at https://www.stockhouse.com/companies/bullboard/t.fcu/fission-uranium-corp#IMX1vPf3URrEtLDg.99
Very important post solutionfinder. Your simple commonsense post sums up the obvious. People need not be confused with the clowns (quakes sudzie jawcellis stanley) attempting to cloud the issue with ridiculous theories.