JS on Smart Investor (video interview), page-129

I can identify several items the AFR got wrong:

(1) BIG linked to Ponzi scheme - hugely sensational, and from the only evidence in the article, untrue (evidence given by AFR: approx 10,000 shares in BIG are owned by the son of an accountant; the father took his own life due to pressure re some investments that has ended up in court). Nothing to do with BIG.

(2) Massie owned more shares than publicly disclosed (final disposition after his resignation indicates this is untrue, unless you think that ASIC are now lying)

(3) SME are paying $15,000 for short videos (not borne out by BIG's website showing costs to SME starting from well below $1000 and the top price being $4000, as well as BIG's ARPU - which would also include much larger customers than SMEs - being well below)

(4) AFR strongly implied that an annual report had not been filed or had been hidden.

(5) AFR strongly implied that the arrangement with FC had been hidden (two announcements in Dec 2015).

(6) AFR made much of the name change of the CEO when that had been announced to the market years ago.

I also object to the attitude that the shorting was minimal so it doesn't count. That's just not true. It doesn't matter if the theoretical someone profited by only $1, if it was due to insider information or market manipulation then it is a crime.

As has been discussed much before, there's plenty of vague nasty innuendo in the AFR articles. AFR were careful not to make any substantial accusations and a huge amount of mud has been thrown in all sorts of directions, which indicates to me they really don't know exactly what it is that BIG has done wrong. I don't doubt that there are issues with BIG, but the question was what has the AFR said that was incorrect, and I have answered that.