hi
@gattertop yes i agree with much of what you say
context is extremely important. its easy with hindsight to look back and say "it should have been disclsoed" as i've just argued
But actually i htink you were right. At the time they didnt know they would have supply chain issues so actually, i think you have turned me on this issue
Therefore, i think likely the reveneue was legally booked correctly (there were contracts, invoices, works done, certificates of completion signed by customers, and cash collected)
And continuous disclsourers at the time probably ok
But that leaves the issue i discuss above about the ASX wanting the trading platform documents and ISX not being able to give it over bc they never got one but the ISX customer saying the works were done as per contract
So i think ASX has put itself in a bad position here, and i dont see them getting out of it unless there is a compromised solution from all parties
That is why i say put the shares in escrow, let ASIC investigate and let the shares trade. That gives ASX a win whilst limiting size of ISX damages claim against ASX
i think ISX looks to be a seriously fantastic business. But their reputation is being tarnished by the ASX supsension (penalty) without accusation and no presumption of innocence which will hurt.
So lets put the shares in escrow lift the ban and get on with it.
