nothing has changed, page-42

NT this is a most unfortunate analysis. Trying to explain away the lack of promotion of a company by saying that the rest of the market plays below a certain moral line is being impractical. We are not in a seminary training to be monks here. We are actually dabbling in the stock market.
When Mark's name becomes synonymous with TZL rather than YBR, then I would take my hat off to Mark. Before that, all these talks of reputational damage are but empty rhetoric as when the investment public thinks of Mark, there is no inkling of his association with TZL.
In this case we have one of the biggest asset of the company, Mark not being used to promote the company.
We all know we have groundbreaking technology, first mover advantage, market penetration if the CEO update is to be believed,cash in the bank, a high profile chairman and yet we are trading at a market cap of ~20X PE of PDT profit alone.
Don't blame the market for not loving TZ because the market have not been made aware of the NEW TZ!
Mark, give us a sign that you would let your name become synonymous with TZ which could be a leading multinational if guided well!
There was also some mention of the ASIC case against Andrew Forrest, the comparison is a bit of a furphy. I have followed the ASIC case quite closely. The trial judge was most critical of the approach taken by ASIC and dismissed the case which is now being appealed by ASIC. It involved FMG believing that they have a contract with the Chinese who subsequently denied that the agreement was binding though FMG legal advisers thought the agreement was binding. This has nothing to do with promoting a company by briefing media, brokers, analysts outside of Patterson. If the CEO update cannot be released through ASX because as some alleged, it may contravene listing rules, then by making the information public on its website and not on ASX, this in my view would constitute withholding of market sensitive information.