Ann: Demerger of European Businesses, page-500

OK, your first error there is in "ASX & their lapdog ASIC". I could report that and get it removed for being defamatory, unsubstantiated, and just plain incorrect, but I won't.

Your second error is "do you want us all to burn him and ISX 10k shareholders to the ground". Let's be clear. Getting rid of JK would be better for ISX shareholders. Whether you are pro-ISX (and there's an anti-JK agenda) or anti-ISX (and a legitimate case against JK), you tend to agree that if JK were removed, and new management installed, we'd be much quicker at getting to trade again. Taking your side of things, removing JK is still a better option. JK knows that this is the case, which is why he's so gung-ho on trying to propagandise our holders - doesn't want to be deposed. That's unfortunate, because if he were such a decent, kind CEO as he pretends to be, then even if he was innocent, he'd step down to try to get us trading again. That would be best for the company. But he won't, because he's a megalomaniac.

There was a question there though, so to answer it: yes. I want JK off the board. I want new management in place, who will actually give ASX the documents they were looking for. You know, the ones JK refused to provide, and as a result, ASX declared ongoing breaches of continuous disclosure obligations. I want management who will work to get us reinstated, not ones who will use our money (shareholder and company funds) to defend a CEO accused of defrauding investors.

No, JK is not trying to get us reinstated. He's trying to get to keep his allegedly ill-gotten shares, and only secondarily to that, to get us trading again. One is far more important to him than the other. I don't blame him for that - I'd want to keep millions of dollars in shares too. But let's not pretend he's Mother Teresa here.