Ann: Change of Director's Interest Notice x 2, page-289

Dear Dr Manhattan

yes, you are correct: AVZ's announcement was that the samples for drill holes 1 and 7, while delayed, were received at the same time on 5/9.

I meant to convey this in my post but realize it was not stated clearly enough.

What is the logical and legal inference? Fortunately, it is good news! The announcement about drill hole 7 will have to be very positive. Because if not, AVZ will need to explain why it choose not to concurrently analyse and announce samples received at the same time. The burden of proof will be on the director to explain why he chose to announce only drill hole 1 results, then traded a massive 30% of his holdings, and then had drill hole 7 results analysed and announced.

Moreover, the question whether the director is an Australian resident, or an Australian resident for tax purposes, or a citizen of Germany, Monaco, or elsewhere, will be completely irrelevant.

Thanks again