Whether people like it or not, on the face of it, it appears that ISX broke no laws or listing rules regarding the milestone shares. The milestone shares were a pre-requisite to Otis Energy buying (old) ISX's assets and with a strong statement of disadvantage written for Otis Energies (OE) shareholders by an independent advisor, these same investors voted 99% to accept the terms for earning the milestone shares because OE shareholders simply wanted ISX. And ASX also approved the terms.
People may not "like the look of it", but that is not the way the law works. ASX, or any Australian for that matter, cannot legally act as a vigilante based on its/their own questionable value system. Australia is a law based (which means a fact-based) society.
Like it or not, ISX's revenue also earned value for ISX shareholders. ISX directors expected the revenue to flow in 2018 but due to the multiple upstream issues out of ISX's control, ISX put in its own tier-1 system completed in December 2018. Revenues flowed in 2019 hence entry into the ASX300.
The "revenue" questioned in the later part of 2018 was actually "cost of sales" items, as I understand.
We have been told that ISX took ASX to court in December because Directors could see that ASX was determined to release to the market what ISX considered a false and misleading report which took into consideration irrelevant facts while disregarding relevant facts and which stood to further damage ISX's reputation. ISX was, and still is, also convinced that ASX had no intention of ever seeing ISX trade again. There is a relevant question whether this is, in fact, the work of a vigilante.
ISX is first and foremost a transaction monitoring business for AML/ATF purposes - every other activity hangs off that fact. ISX will and should take as a customer any company that has not been stated by ASIC, LexisNexis, and other regulators as being a company with whom people should not do business. Otherwise, these companies will trade with no transaction monitoring. ISX has complied with this. As far as I know, ASX has no right to prosecute a company today for having a customer yesterday who has been proclaimed to be corrupt only today - unless today ISX does not stop having the company as a customer.
So, considering the fact that Otis Energy shareholders and ASX did approve the terms of the milestone shares (i.e. revenue = turnover and can be earned at the expense of profit) what might the motive be for ASX to write in its "Final Reasons" report, " ...it could not reasonably have been in contemplation of the parties when the terms of the Performance Shares were originally agreed between ISX (then Otis Energy) and the original holders, ...".
Also, what might have been the motive of ASX to state in this same report that it was questioning the "quality" of "some of the parties ISX did business with" in 2018 and using as references media articles, judgements, ASIC and UK advisories in 2019 and 2020?
The question I have is this: if the suspension and investigation haven't been for the more onerous reason such as to get rid of ASX's competition, what other motive remains for ASX to release such questionably false and misleading statements to the market?
ASX moral indignation?
Expand
