Liabilities exceed assets - so what, page-38

Madamswer while I agree with the theme on most of your posts regarding personal accountability I think you are drawing a long bow on questioning people's intelligence or insight for believing company announcements. In the absence of evidence to the contrary why wouldn't you believe a company is fulfilling its legal obligation to tell the truth? Other sources of information? Ratings agencies, broker reports, financial advisors, even - heaven forbid - shorters like Glaucus - all have their own agendas which may not necessarily align with that of a retail investor on any given day. So yes experience and your own ability to judge risk and your personal appetite for it comes into play. But even then if the information on which you are basing your decision is fraudulently inaccurate (ie "management lied"), then I'm sorry then that isn't the fault of the investor. Lesson learned? Hmmm only invest in banks or blue chips? Well my memory is a bit fuzzy but I think even a few of them have gone bust over the years taking some pretty big scalps and savvy investors with them. With the volume of cash at stake in the stock market why shouldn't people call for greater scrutiny from bodies like ASIC? Yet according to you it is just a cop out for investors to say that so they don't have to face themselves for a making a poor decision. Let me conclude by saying I am not talking specifically about QIN here - nothing has been proven to be fraudulent at this stage. And - going back to your many points with which I agree - in recent months there has been plenty of additional information out there to make people see an alternative story to the one Quintis is spruicking. I just reckon it's an easy thing to fire off a few generalisations in discussions like these when every investment is a gamble to some degree unless you have a crystal ball. Just my 29.5 cents worth.