accounts, page-28

boogie17

Thanks for your confirmation.

Regarding the P1 listing, I was not making "wild accusations" as Miranda1 alleged.

Perhaps we can have a more temperate exchange of views. I was keying my doubts (not accusations) into the ASX listing rules, which deal with share holder spread.

http://www.asxgroup.com.au/media/PDFs/Chapter01.pdf

As I understand things, the P1 shares were given to GCN share holders free of charge, "in order to facilitate the proposed ASX listing of Priority One." That's what the GCN Chairman said in his address of 18th November.

Was this to obtain the necessary share holder spread? I can't see any other reason.

My problem is this.

On page 103 of the listing rules there is a statement that spread must not be obtained by artifical means. What does the ASX mean by artificial means? Well, on page 104 ASX offers as its first example, "Giving shares away."

In rubbishing my doubts, Miranda1 said (among other things): "Put simply if P1 would not have met the listing requirements the ASX would have challenged them on the proposed listing and this has not happened."

I was not aware that P1 had yet put in an application. In fact the various announcements suggest that application is some way down the track. So if no application, then why would ASX have challenged them yet?

Or might the matter of spread have been resolved between P1 and ASX, by informal negotiation, before an application for listing is submitted?

If that informal negotiation has not happened, then I maintain my doubts.

It would be good to have your opinion on this matter, assuming (as it appears) that you have some knowledge about listing rules.