I finally received the Offer in the mail and had a chance to read it. I think (and yes some of this has probably been hashed over but the last while has been a blur):

The most interesting part was the 'Background to the Offer", pages 38-41 where various discussions etc were detailed. In particular, K was involved very very early. More importantly, on Oct 29th, 2007, K and ARU were talking about a transaction. At that time, K was trading at about $18.68 and ARU at $9.80. This means that AT THAT TIME, K would have put a value of FDN at $9.80 at least otherwise, why talk about a transaction?

A JV type arrangement was discussed in June,2008 and dismissed by ARU. Why? If we think the current 100% deal sucks, one would think a 50% deal would only suck half as much?

July 3rd, ARU board says that the preference is for a buyout. Again, why? If you know what FDN is worth, you know the new law will be at least acceptable, a wahck of board member options at $8+ that are worthless, why say 100% is preferrable?

Part of the deal is the lock-up in that ARU cannot solicte offers..but it can accept them AND K must vote for a better offer. ARU insisted on this.

Note how both companies informed the government about the pending deal. And what better playground for the new mining law than a bidding war for the prime deposit? I still belive the holdup in the mining law has to do with FDN and another bid.

Now, finally, from this discussion in the Offer we can see how much time and effort was expended by both parties over a long period of time. Of particular note is that on several occasions, various 'transaction possibilities' were discussed. This means that behind the scenes and on a VERBAL basis only, VALUES were discussed, mining costs and capex were discussed. Now, how many other CA's were signed? I believe it would safe to assume that at least a handful of these were to the same extent as K.

The more I think about this the more I think the government is abigger player in this than just the new minimg laws. A jumpstart to the new mining laws would be a bidding war of some kind, not a meek sub par offer. If the governement truly wants the investment they NEED some signature properties to shine, to bring large value. I do not find it a coincidence that the mining law 'delay' and the current offer are on the same time line.

I know some want to tar and feather the ARU board but I just cant see the years of work they have done just being handed over. If this is the case, well I will bring the tar brush, but I think there is a bigger scenario playing out in the background.

Just my humble opinion...