Bridge, I'm reading your mail but from:
1) basic fairness;
2) market integrity;
3) "accountability for untrue material representations that have been made to the market"
4) appropriate corporate governance
points of view, isn't the fact that this whole thing looks so stinky make it more attractive? If certain people are doing unsavory things in order to advance an unsavory agenda, they do so with serious risk. This nastiness would not occur if the company was worthless. The company, in the form of the current offer is being stolen. At least that is my opinion. The battlefield (should it materialize) would hurt ARMZ as well. My feeling, they might we well served to make a more appropriate offer.