I think most of us agree/acknowledge as a minimum a great deal of contempt/distrust towards the management teams of UBS/LOK.

The notion that the court supervised sale of assets ... especially the spectrum does put at risk the ability to put the "best" (most money/share value) offer on the table and be assured of its acceptance.

This could allow for the bad feelings between our team and the bidders to influence the outcome without a final appeal to the shareholders.

In addition, a 2/3 majority of the voting shares could allow for management to make a deal they percieve in th best interest ... i.e. sale of spectrum to UBS or even another company with the pre authorization to do whatever they like.

They contents of the proposal to shareholders is all important and IMO must contain a clause which ensures that the final bid selected by the managment team is at least equivalent to minimum 90% of the highest financial offer for them to proceed and any offer from a company not operating on a non arms length basis is automatically rejected.

Anything less than that calls into question the possibility of a sale for much less than fair value and funny business.

On the other hand ... if all is on the up and up ... it is not inconceivable that bids begin to the company prior to the meeting to keep the shareholders invloved in the process as a method to protect against negotiating exclusively with the managment team.

The more I think of this the more intersting it becomes.

In the meantime I will be in contact with Peter Block looking for the presence of the two clauses or something reasonably similar to avoid a bait and switch type promise to maximize shareholder value. Will keep you posted on that.

Orgy