Ann: ASX Query Letters re ISX suspension & termination by Visa, page-91

G'day,

Another day, another storm in a teacup.

When you look at the timing of things, as outlined in the ASX release, ASX are using ASIC like some sort of marionette puppet to do the investigative work that they are otherwise precluded from doing. That is, they don't have the power to compel production from Visa Europe, so they come in the side door. 'We don't have authority to pursue this spurious line of inquiry but under your internationally wide-reaching ASIC powers, do you think you could do us a solid?' Please, spare me. Who is steering this fiasco because it is out of control.

When you're spiraling down the litigation toilet and you know it, offense can often be a form of defence. They're going down the spout and are hoping that by arcing up again, it will do enough to throw the general public off the scent. ASX are cobbling together whatever they can to make a story but it's house of cards stuff. "How do relate this latest notice back to the initial suspension on 2 October 2019 when it wasn't even on the horizon", would be the first question. It's all ex post facto. I can only assume that they're doing it in an attempt to stem the flow of damages and try and limit them to a closed period.

Further, Visa are not Judge, jury, and executioner here. If they take their own action for whatever reason applying whatever protocol they have in their business model, how can ASX ride on the coattails of that to justify their ongoing suspension? They're separate tests applying completely different criteria and that's before before you even lift a legal pen. Visa have got their own problems and when you do some research into what they're seeking to attain on an intellectual property front, I'm not satisfied that they're a blameless party either. They all want a piece of the action.

Even more laughable is how this is 'market-sensitive' when you've had the company on the sideline for the better part of a year when it actually surfaced (even assuming it is relevant). Likewise, who's going to be affected by any non-disclosure? The multitudes dealing in millions of ISX shares off-market?! Come on, that's stretching credulity beyond breaking point. I haven't descended into the correspondence yet only to note that one letter of request ran to about 13 pages. What's being sought is oppressive on any view. I hate to think of the sort of resources that ASX sinking into this at the expense of their other duties and obligations.

You can expect another amended SOC on the back of this to incorporate the particulars of it and if the Judge asks why, then Counsel for ISX will no doubt explain this latest sorry chapter. There will be those that will always be going to bat for ASX. Qintex had similar support many years ago for a while. The new age of market trading is arriving and, hopefully, Australia can be part of it. Technological dinosaurs, not just here but across the board, are going to struggle to maintain the place that have enjoyed and taken for granted.

Cheers.