At the risk of coming across as a bit of a pedant, the fact that...

At the risk of coming across as a bit of a pedant, the fact that NZ shareholders have - during the course of trading today - been aware of their allocation while Australia-domiciled shareholders have not been advised, risks being a bit of an issue.

Because it effectively means that an asymmetrical information set has been caused to exist.

Personally, I don't give a jot whether I learn how many shares I have been allocated today, next week or next month for that matter, because it will have no bearing on any investment decisions I make.

But it could be argued that the company has failed to treat all shareholders equally, by dint of varying information availability among shareholders, something which would fail governance tests.

I suspect the problem lies with the NZ and the Australia arms of the registry company not talking to one another, but the fact of the matter is that the company's management appoints the service provider and it is incumbent on management to ensure that the service provider abides by the company's mandate and charter.

As I said, I don't care too much, other than it is sloppy and reflects poorly on the process.

But there might be shareholders who - in a volatile day such as today - might have made differing investment decisions, either in terms of buying more shares or selling some of their holdings, depending on how much stock they got allocated in the SPP.

Again, not a train smash, but sloppy.

.