As I stated, selling into the spike was not only their only option, but a common sense move for them.
I'm not saying entities do not necessarily have knowledge that is not privy to the public. I am saying that there is no evidence of insider trading. If you believe it was insider trading, meaning that it was based on financially sensitive information that is NEGATIVE for CXZ, then why would you continue to hold? There is a logical fallacy woven in your belief if you do continue to hold, and you should have sold when Lucerne sold. Furthermore, when and under what terms would you define it as 'acceptable' for a private fund to sell their holding in a company? How much profit does the company need to make before a fund such as Lucerne can acceptably take their profits off the table? It seems like a limited perspective that does not factor in the needs of all stakeholders, or perhaps a short term view.
As to your question of sentiment, I believe it is very mixed. There is some purposeful manipulation going on: I've seen sell-offs purposefully timed at close in what has been an otherwise strong day of trading, repeated tiny parcel trades to lower the active price. The TA junkies will all be shaking in their boots as support falls - and those staring at paper losses will find it harder to maintain conviction. Smart players are soaking up shares at these prices. I've put in 50% of what I'd be willing to invest in this company, if it falls any further I'd happily put in more.
You suggest that the company needs to release information for the "average punter" under the assumption that they are too lazy to inform themselves. Possibly, but that will only alter the share price in the short term. Is that important? Not really. I would rather that the company dedicate time and resources to acquiring revenue - not entertaining shareholders. I could give you a long list of companies I have watched closely who publish a barrage of fluff announcements that are eaten up by the market, only to fall flat come reporting season and be dumped down. I prefer a company who simply gets on with the business. There are many companies trading, whose sole business is to publish overly positive announcements and fluff pieces in order to continually tap shareholders for fund and pay management exorbitant amounts - that is what I find deplorable. All that being said, as I stated before, I fully expect the company will deliver a shareholder presentation in the coming months and would be surprised if they did not.
In response to sentiment being the strongest driver, sentiment can change like the wind in a small cap. The company only one month ago released all pertinent information to the public - which had this share running well on its way to 4-6c territory. Lucerne dumped, and sentiment goes in the other direction. So of course, sentiment is what drives price action - but it's fickle. If you are happy to invest long term, then you don't pay attention to the fickle, you pay attention to the fundamentals of a share, and IMO, this share currently offers some of the best value combined with growth potential on the ASX.
Expand
(20min delay)