RE:an edda IQ collaboration would have pleased all investorsTcheck... again I have to say Wow!!!
You say you can't find anything on Edda, don't know who they are... YET you say Edda seems to have the identical financial means as Pallinghurst! How is it that Pallinghurst got its bid in on time with the 5% deposit? Edda didn't get a bid in, couldn't decide whether they were in or out and had no way of coming up with the money! Read the 10th monitor's report, don't listen to the bullshit on this board from those, like yourself, probably using the rosary beads in prayer asking for divine intervention!
Please re-read sections 6 & 7 of the SISP that outlines what a "qualified bidder" is. Then read section 9 defining what a qualified bid is! Read carefully... your wishful thinking re Edda does not make it a qualified bid! Just because it sounds good, looks good, feels good to you doesn't make it a bid worth consideration by the board. You're so S.O.L. ...
Tcheck wrote: not just the board of directors
and would therefore have been the better solution .
edda it seems has identical financial means as pallinghurst
and they have the added merit of being inclined to include all shareholders .
good for the company and good for the majority of its shareholders
:)
so the survival of the company is and was not at stake here .
why chose the worst solution then ? to please LEGO politicians.
i can t find anything on EDDA though .
i would like to know who they are .