All the report states is under Other Matters: "voting for or against the Proposal is a matter for individual members, based on their own views as to value, their expectations about future market conditions and their particular circumstances including risk profile, liquidity preference, perception of the benefits of the co-operative structure and personal financial position."

What is this "perception of the benefits of the co-operative structure"? What about the actual benefits of farmer ownership and control. What about this argument by the President of the Co-operative Council of Australia, Mr. Tony O'Shea, " If Australian dairy farmers are to be protected against future farm-gate prices being driven downwards to ensure the profitability of  investors, the farmers MUST keep control of the milk from milking shed to consumer's table.  The ONLY way to do that is via a strong Co-operative which collects the profits  derived from downstream processing, value-adding and marketing, and returns those profits to the milk suppliers!"

Instead, the emphasis of Grant Samuel is on what they identify as "in the best interests of Dairy Farmers members."

What Grant Samuel regards as in the best interests is described as: "In the absence of the Proposal or some alternative proposal, Dairy Farmers members cannot realise the full value of their equity in the company. In Grant Samuel's view, the Consideration is fair and reasonable. The prospects of a higher alternative proposal appear remote."

But, the "company" is, in fact, a co-operative and the point is member ownership, use and benefit - not the full value of equity. This is a profit-driven  imperative of investor-owned companies as opposed to the service-driven imperative of co-operatives.