Frontline and DHT Holdings continue to trade blows in an increasingly hostile takeover tussle.

Today it was Frontline’s turn to speak out in a drama now in its fifth month and spanning three public offers – each of which has been rejected.

Robert Hvide Macleod, chief executive of Frontline Management, used an open letter to DHT chairman Erik Lind to rebuff previous suggestions from the target and press its own case for a transaction.

However, another bid was not forthcoming from Frontline just days after chairman John Fredriksen has expressed his own disinterest in the matter.

Some of the content in the latest letter will be familiar to those following the drama, including debate over the adoption of a poison pill by DHT and the basis for valuing a transaction.

However, some new areas of argument also emerged, including DHT’s management structure and the merits of having co-chief executives.

“We cannot think of a single shipping company that has two CEOs, and query whether DHT's board has properly considered the costs duplication, corporate governance complexities and inefficiencies of that arrangement,” Macleod wrote.

Svein Moxnes Harfjeld has always held the CEO’s title while at DHT, while Trygve Munthe was initially president of the New York-listed owner before the formal change was made.

Macleod’s letter began by branding previous claims from DHT’s board that it is open to exploring alternatives to enhance shareholder value as “untrue”.

He also hit out at its use of “legal mechanisms to entrench the board and management of DHT” and its alleged refusal to allow investors a “realistic opportunity” to consider the Frontline offer.

DHT, in an earnings call last week, suggested Frontline had chosen not to put a bid to its investors despite having opportunities to make such a move.

“Your criticism of our offer is self-serving and misleading, particularly in light of the fact that DHT itself has deemed the offer ‘non-coercive’,” Macleod wrote.

Frontline’s last offer, tabled at 0.80 of its own shares for every DHT share, was rejected last week. At the time Frontline was told it would not be handed the DHT fleet “on the cheap”.

How any deal between the rivals should be priced has been a contentious issue throughout the discussions, which initially began in private a year ago.

Macleod today said DHT’s focus on its earnings contribution to the larger platform ignored the “immediate value creation” of its own proposal and increased "upside potential" in holding Frontline shares.

He argued that the starting point for a combination should be net asset value, and questioned why DHT shares trade below that level.

“Every day the market has expressed a vote of ‘no confidence’ in the DHT board and its management,” Macleod asserted.

“Our proposal to combine with DHT did not include the retention of either the DHT board or senior management and, in our view, is one of the key reasons for the imposition of the multiple entrenchment measures you have put in place.”

DHT’s rejection letter last week suggested it was time for both firms to move on. However, there is no apparent sign of Frontline giving up the public pursuit. 

On Monday Macleod requested the DHT directors commence good faith negotiations with Frontline on its offer or remove a poison pill provision that would allow the company to take an offer directly to DHT shareholders.