trustworthy management, page-16

There seems to be plenty of contradictions with your post, paymenow.

"It is a very serious statement to make about a director ,without any facts, that they withheld price sensitive information. "

& then

"The bad news isn't all out I'm guessing or else we would have had a follow up announcement from them by now."


As you say, even now they are withholding --- the reasons for the delay & sudden cost blowout.


You say "I have no doubt that someone knew that all was not well but there is nothing to indicate it was the directors. Maybe senior management didn't disclose problems to the MD?"

This is a small company (small number of employess & really just one real project at the moment) & if the directors haven't got reporting milestones in place to ensure they are full informed in a timely fashion, then it's a reflection of their ability/professionalism more than anything else.

"I'm guesing that in mining rumours spread quickly about problems, and these rumours tend to become fact."

Oh so true. There have been mutterings about further delays since the beginning of this year.

"Would you expect these rumours to have gotten back to senior management/directors? Yes. Would that ring alarm bells? Yes. Would you expect management/directors to question this? Yes."

Pretty damning case you are building here!

"If they didn't is that criminal conduct? No."

Is that how we judge the performance of directors now ...... by the criminal codes?

"On the face of it it appears that the market was better informed than the directors until proven otherwise."

If we go down the legal 'defence' route here, it should be noted that ignorance is not a defence!