I am not really up on the detailed regulatory processes but it was mentioned in today's announcement that after receiving the advice from BSI, the company asked an independent body to assess the BSI submission and this assessment deemed the BSI submission as "Poor".
You say it has nothing to do with management but I beg to differ. Wouldn't an astute management team have ensured an independant review of the BSI submission BEFORE it was placed in the hands of the EMA? Shouldn't management have crossed their T's and dotted their I's first? Last time I checked, that was and has always been a fair expectation of investors, we are after all putting our hard earned money in their hands and relying on them to bring about a good outcome.
I may well be wrong (god knows I have been before) but I would much appreciate your response to this and hearing your thoughts on why you think "it has nothing to do with management". To me, that is like a small business owner saying that although they own the company, it has nothing to do with them whether the company succeeds or fails.An old saying comes to mind here, pass the buck". Is TIS trying to pass the buck onto BSI? If management is not responsible for this debacle then who is?
Many investors have their hard earned on the line with mortgages and kids to boot, some serious questions need to be answered here about management practices at TIS. I am not a large company CEO but even I would have enough common sense to check, re-check and tripple check the submission before it was made. Seems this was not done!
Surfrat
TIS Price at posting:
14.9¢ Sentiment: Hold Disclosure: Held
