https://hotcopper.com.au/posts/59042084/singleI'm on Argento's 'ignore' list apparently, I'll have to address him/her in the third person.
Argento says that I am digging myself into an ever deeper hole. You know, I really can't see that. One of us is digging a hole. Let's try to figure out who.
I continually say "Directors' direct and
indirect holdings". Is the meaning of indirect holdings the problem for Argento?
To get to the bottom of this you have to read ASX Guidance Note 22 - Directors Disclosure. You can skip the first six pages without loss if you are in a hurry. Here's the link:
https://www.asx.com.au/documents/rules/gn22_disclosure_of_interests.pdfSo, I may be wrong, but my interpretation of Note 22 is that an indirect holding is Shares or Options held in a trust, a SMSF, joint holding with spouse, a family trust, a
Company or any other similar vehicle where a Director has what the ASX describes as a major interest. Argento tells us that Justyn Peters said that "Directors and
their Companies have invested $25 Million in LCK". Is that correct? If so, then taking note of the adjective "
their" to mean they have a major interest, at least, in their Companies, then they have a duty to report that indirect holding firstly to LCK, then LCK reports that interest to the ASX. That's how I read Note 22
Theoretical example 1 : For ASX Listed Company ZZZ. Director 1 has a 100% interest in Watershed Pty Ltd, his private Company and that Company owns 30 million ZZZ shares. This is an
indirect holding and needs to be reported to the ASX.
Quick example 2 : Director 2 has 50 million shares lodged with Big New York Bank Trust. If that holding, when added to others, causes BNYBT to become a Top 20 holder, then the total holding of the BNYB Trust is reported under the Trust name in the Top 20 List. Director 2's name does not appear there.
However, Director 2 must still report this holding to ZZZ, who then report it to the ASX as an
indirect holding.
The reason for reporting Director's holdings is not only so investors and others can see whether Directors have skin in the game. It also helps people judge whether most or all Directors voting together might be able to form a blocking stake.
I have been very careful [I think] to not give any opinion on which amount, $25m or $11.4m Max is correct. That's obviously because I don't know. I say only that it is a big discrepancy, on the face of it, and it seems difficult to bridge the gap.
I still need to answer the cheap shots flung my way about the coal seam Vs ISG thing. But one conversation at a time, eh?
