Want to know the motive? Well to a completely independent party like me the motive I think has been quite obvious. To understand it you first need to acknowledge why the suspension happened in the first place.
Everything began when ownership matters released an independent report questioning how ISX's performance shares hurdles were achieved, ie. revenue.
Relatively shortly after, ASIC expressed its concerns towards ISX's books and records to the ASX. Additionally, ASIC also advised the ASX that it was considering launching a formal investigation into matters concerning ISX.
The ASX then informed ISX that they were going to suspend it from trading. Soon after, the ASX suspended ISX in consultation with ASIC pending the outcome of separate investigations launched by both ASIC and the ASX.
To draw lesson from wirecard, what the ASX and ASIC did were justified.
ASIC is currently investigating the same matters as the ASX (as per ISX's own court submission).
The ASX released the statement of reasons (SOR)/findings at the conclusion of its investigation. The SOR detailed that ISX had broken multiple listing rules. It is also detailed in the SOR that almost all payments for the 4 key contracts were paid for by completely "unknown" entities instead of by the customers themselves.
There are also many other important details as explained in the SOR.
So my view: ISX seems to be unable to account for its revenues and would continue to be suspended until it is able to do so. The performance shares and thus the number of SOI is in limbo so suspension would continue until it isn't. So my suggestion how to fix it? ISX should appoint a globally renowned independent auditor ie. PWC to review all of its financials and then release the findings.
So why are you guys no pushing for a full independent audit? Everything centred around revenue that led to the performance shares being released so why is ISX not pushing for a full independent audit? If ISX is innocent then the full audit will exonerate ISX in full. If ISX isn't innocent then it would at least provide closure.
So why not?
