re: 'this is it'crap..you id#t... Hi Malcomm,
I see that to challenge the veracity of the statements being made by MUL amounts to being a "knocker".
It's funny though, most HC commentators in relation to MUL are merely glossing over the fact that the price of the $3.5M Findlay is very expensive indeed. Both in an interest rate sense, and in a conversion price discount sense. Or, is that something that you disagree with?
Similarly, I have questioned the way in which the Findlay report was represented as being independent. It may well have been developed by Findlay, but yesterday's hype was headlined "Important Independent Corporate Research".
No mention of Findlay's connection to the Company which:
1)
through the provision of a $3.5M loan facility;
2)
convertible into between 50 -70M shares; and
3)
the approval of which was to be agreed to at this morning's General Meeting,
....
meant that Findlay and MUL were connected and related parties by virtue of the loand transaction.
I knock poor corporate governance issues, opaque market disclosures, and high yielding marketing blurbs, the collective substance of which go to:
1)
generating market hype;
2)
potentially misleading some traders (ie: caught in the hype, ignoring the substance); and
3)
risk harming the integrity of the Company which the issues in question are meant to safeguard.
I also assess things on the basis of business and market substance. For example, the Findlay report all but dismisses the prospective competitive threat of iPStar. That may well prove to be the case, but what if its not? What then will the Brokers /Company say?
More to the point, what will HC posters say?
Out of interest, was yesterday's report certified in the same way as most analyst reports are now certified?
Next year, it will be quite interesting to see how many of the companies currently listed on the ASX function when both their CFOs and their CEOs have to certify the accuracy of their accounts /statements.
Like This-is-it, I receive and access a wide range of industry related media /research concerning all telecom /comms linked sectors (locally and globally).
Maybe, I'm a knocker of the MUL success story, but for the time being that success is being rapidly built on the back of hype which is being used to ramp up a share price. And this is for a company that has issued >40% of its currently issued capital over the last 12 months.
Now, one question before going:
If the Findlay loan is of such fair value, then why are credit card styled interest rates being charged?
Can you answer me that?
MUL
multiemedia limited
