Why did they do it?

The reason IMO that the board surrendered was because the private equity groups were hovering and wanted control. I had direct conversations with PE guys were they stated they were unhappy and wanted a new board. I would not have wanted to be involved in an AVB that did not have the ongoing support of our now ex-board. A lengthy handover is a requirement in Brazil IMO. OZL have achieved that and it is obvious that was the board's choice of outcomes given their choices. Did they do the right thing by share holders in general?

Can u imagine a totally fresh board, (none of the executive directors present, all having taken their handsome exit packages which would have paid them nearly as well as the options) and how AVB would have proceeded with regulatory issues etc? Would have been delays, cap raising after cap raising and dilution as far as I can see.

I know it's hard to take when we expected so much more but the board may have done us a favour. I'm sure in their own minds they did. Regardless, we have all learnt a lot about the power and influence of private equity and yes, that is one Phil9 called years ago. Once PE have that much stock management are no longer in control.

I see no evidence for manipulation by any of the major players in the sense that has been talked about by most on these boards. In my eyes the manipulation was in the use of power, not the buying or selling of stock. If anyone has evidence of share price manipulation I would love to see it as we have a fighting fund ready in the event it is required for a class action. I'm not interested in anything but 'evidence' though.

PS I've never been interested in ASIC or similar parties. They don't operate for the benefit of share holders IMO. They win a case share holders do not get the compensation as far as I am aware. Happy to be corrected with specific examples?


Good luck to all going forward.