QUOTE(wwloon32 @ May 27 2010, 10:36 PM)
We can always vote "NO", and if there is enough "hands" to say "no",
then the resolutions will not be passed.
It's not about how much share that vote, it's about how much shareholder that vote.
And the more share concentrated, the more dangerous it's,
because when there is 99.9% of share goes to big shareholder and the company management,
and 1 share for another shareholder, if the small shareholder vote "NO" in every resolutions,
it'll effectively force to AGM to ground. Because as company management,
they don't exercise their vote, which is why I believe that HO HUP tussle was set in.
Company resolution is passed on the basic of majority of shareholders agree aka on the basic of majority in shareholding.
Unless in certain special circumstance like going to be implemented "asset and liabilities" sale/disposal ruling proposed by SC, which need higher watermark or some special circumstances that majority shareholders can't vote due to legislation or ruling incurred (which to protect the minority shareholders interest issue one), most resolution are passed based on majority in shareholding.
Ho Hup tussle has a lot of number of shareholding as both parties didn't hold the majority stake of 51%. They need other shareholders to vote favourable them to win in the EGM.
The % of shareholding dictates whether the resolution proposed can be go through or not.