Let sellers of the LME beware Everyone is over the moon about the sale of the London Metal Exchange to Hong Kong Exchanges & Clearing for almost £1.4bn, right? Not quite: as Sir Brian Bender, LME chairman, revealed in a letter to shareholders this week, one of the LME's 12 board members voted against the idea of selling the 135-year-old exchange. I have learnt that the sole dissenter was Gabriela Grillo, the board representative of the LME's "trade" shareholders - such titans of the metal industry as Glencore, the leading metals trader, Codelco, the largest copper miner, and Aurubis, Europe's top copper smelter. Ms Grillo did not respond to requests for comment. The LME declined to comment. But the physical metals community has been clear in its views about the sale: the LME is working just fine at the moment, say these traders, smelters, processors and miners, so why sell it? As one large industrial user (and small shareholder) of the LME puts it: "My concern as a user of the LME is that it is paramount that the system remains untouched." Of course, HKEx has promised to leave the LME system untouched until 2015. Together with the high price tag and the allure of opening up the enormous Chinese market, that promise has been enough to woo most shareholders. Small shareholders such as Ms Grillo (whose company owns a 0.1 per cent stake in the LME) will punch above their weight in the vote thanks to a rule that says the sale must be approved by at least half of the shareholders by number. But it still seems unlikely that the trade community would be able to block the sale, since all the LME's largest shareholders are thought to be onside. But the trade is important. The Mittelstand smelters and traders and British merchants who make up the bottom of the LME's shareholder register are the LME's core community. They have been loyal to the exchange for more than a century and are essential to maintaining the close link between its contracts and the physical market. So it is worth considering their objection to the sale. It is easy to picture the sort of downside scenario that they fear. Imagine that, two years after completing the acquisition of the LME, the HKEx has failed to open the market to China as it planned. The exchange has not persuaded Beijing to relax capital controls to allow greater Chinese participation on the LME; neither has it approved LME warehouses in China. Worse, rising interest rates, tighter regulation and a general lack of enthusiasm about commodities as an asset class have dealt a blow to the LME's overall trading volumes. The bullish revenue growth assumptions that underpinned HKEx's valuation of the LME are in tatters. Charles Li, the HKEx chief executive, loses his job. And his successor, no longer burdened with promises about the LME's business model, sets about reassessing his predecessor's disastrous acquisition. In such a scenario, no one knows what may happen. But it is easy to imagine that the new HKEx boss may significantly raise fees, close the ring, move the exchange to Hong Kong from London, or even attempt a fire sale. There is no reason at the moment to believe such a scenario will come to pass. But it makes clear the risks involved in the sale for LME shareholders and users. As the industrial user of the LME, who plans to vote against the sale, says: "There is too much uncertainty. Whatever is not written on paper might not work out the way you think it will be. Caveat venditor. The Commodities Note is a daily online commentary on the industry from the Financial Times.