now what, page-77

Folks, as far as I'm aware there are only two indisputable facts:

AVX has called a trading halt because it is possession of price sentistive information it cannot release to the market yet; and
that price sensitive information concerns ATC.

Everything else must be consistent with the above facts. We can therefore discount company closure, takeover or capital raising as they were not the reason given for seeking the halt. Similarly, circumstances that AVX controls, and could therefore announce to the market immediately, such as by itsef the sacking of the CEO, can be discounted, as AVX wouldn't seek a halt before annnouncing. When you also consider that Friday was a great day to get bad news out and then blame the market for a price drop ...

so if redundancies have occurred, they must have occurred in circumstances consistent with the facts. The only logical explaination I can think of is that a deal has been done concerning ATC that is being inked, and this has lead to redundancies. All other explainations are not consistent with either the announcement realating to ATC or a trading halt being sought.

Happy to hear other thougts, but let's concerntrate on facts.