'The following observations are made in the interests of the subscribers and shareholders of the Shanghai Mutual Telephone Ca., as' various statements in the above report are in our opinion calculated to delude the public, being ignorant of the real import of the tenders.
The report only emphasizes the advantages of the proposals of the International Telephone & Telegraph Corporation, whilst from the other tenders every possible detail is drawn into the limelight in order to prove their ineptitude: Nowhere is there to be found any compara-ive table of clauses setting forth the respective advantages" and disadvantages of the three tenders.
Although the Advisory Committee state the interest of the shareholders to be first in their minds is said that the price offered per share by Ericsson's, ie. Tls. 100 per share, is considered at Toast Tis, 25 too high, thus evidently mote than Tls. 25 too high, whereas the price offered by the International Telephone and Telegraph Corp. i.e, Tls. 75 per share, But what is really a fair It seems evident that the committee ought to have worked out a valuation of the shares so that the shareholders, who are not able to get any information about this important question from the balance sheet would have some guidance. According to the valuation made by Ericsson's and considering the value of the more than 23 mow of land owned by the Company, the real value is at present above Tls. 80. To this is to be added, as always when buying a big company, a certain price for the goodwill, ete, in this case estimated to about Tls. 20 per share.
The only reason why the shareholders should be deprived of Tls. 95 per share, which they ought to have, is said to be consideration of, the subscribers. But this is no feature of the proposal of the International Telephone & Telegraph Corp., as our word should be trusted.
Referring to facts, it could rather be said the reverse atour the ability of the International Telephone Telegraph Corp. to deliver equipment quickly, considering that the central exchange was ordered in 1923 and was not put into service until 1927. Further, the Committee makes a very puzzling statement about the offer of the International 'Telephone & Telegraph Corp., which probably is meant to be a decisive blow to the other tenderers, v "the advantage offered by' International Telephone & Telegraph Corp. for quick organization of the telephone system, and thus better service for the subscribers, lore than outweigh the extra po centage asked. for as return on their capital, which anyway represents a very small additional cost to the subscribers, and not in proportion. to the advantage gained.'
But is it true that the said extra percentage represents but small extra cost to the subscribers?
On the contrary the facts are as follows:
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.