clock ticks for palermo bros as court beckons, page-7

"...cadence1 has done some research and has come up with what seems plausible."

Thanks, Hussy.

I've spoken to John Palermo several times in the past.

And I've had a conversation with him re HotCopper. He told me he was familiar with the site and the people who run it.

However he was quite critical of the quality of the material on the site.

He's not alone. Most senior management I speak to are similarly critical.

Palermo indicated he was not interested in providing information if that information was to be be posted.

While scornful, I sense Palermo nevertheless monitors the PNO threads.

Palermo would appear to be a fair and careful man. He is a JP, a Fellow Chartered Accountant and a man who speaks to his lawyers regularly.

He told me he would not disseminate a top shareholder list to me - a co-owner - until he heard from his lawyers.

Despite several requests to comply with s173 of the Corporations Act 2001, within the obligatory seven days, he's not done so.

And he hasn't returned messages.

Perhaps John Palermo is not speaking because he's been instructed by his lawyers not to speak.

He and PNO are facing sensitive issues as creditor companies controlled by brother, Anthony Palermo, issue Statutory Demands.

My research tells me that the issuance of a Statutory Demand is often the first legal step in a strategy that may lead to wind-up proceedings.

Palermo's lawyers have evidently advised him to dispute the alleged debt(s).

This is a standard response if the recipient of a Statutory Demand wants to counter the Demand strategy and forestall/delay/prevent wind-up action.

I've no doubt that PNO's Statutory Demand announcement to the ASX on March 25 would have been drafted/ratified by the company's lawyers.

I suspect John and Anthony Palermo are considering a number of options/issues.

Will they:

. Settle before going to Court?

. Go to Court?

And if they go to Court, will the Court accept any PNO application to have the Statutory Demands set aside?

If the Court rules against PNO, what then are the implications for the value of the convertible notes controlled by the Palermo families and by Celtic Capital?

Another question: What are John Palermo's co-directors, Dr Christopher John Quirk of OBJ and John James Found thinking?

The three men confer often. Last year they each attended 28 PNO board meetings.

Meantime, I find the legal tactics of Anthony Palermo especially interesting.

Anthony controls Monarch Corporation Pty Ltd and Primelane Pty Ltd.

Both companies are shareholders in and/or creditors of PNO and Consolidated Global Investments (CGI).

When Monarch filed a Statutory Demand on CGI, the company's share price responded by collapsing 70pc.

This hurt Anthony's wealth. But - since John Palermo's Finebase Holdings Pty Ltd owns 54pc of CGI capital - it hurt John's wealth more.

And, in PNO's case, the filing of Stat Demands by both Monarch and Primelane may hurt Anthony. But the filings seem set to hurt John more.

Is the Fratelli Palermo imbroglio mainly about principle? Mainly about principal? Or mainly about money?

We should know more by Friday, April 11 when the 21 day Stat Demand clock is due to stop ticking.