Share
39 Posts.
lightbulb Created with Sketch. 9
clock Created with Sketch.
10/02/20
09:14
Share
Originally posted by DD72:
↑
Scott that is what I can't reconcile, ige are saying now that the funding they told the market through adia doesn't exist but it doesn't matter because the market didn't know who adia were and the sp is in a downtrend anyway. That is utter bullship when a company announces to the market (twice) they have finalised $300 million in funding, that is a game changer of epic proportions. How these morons tried to justify that it doesn't matter is beyond me: From the response page 13 where it basically says we weren't factual but it doesn't matter anyway "Summary of market impact of the ADIA announcement Based on the actual market movement, the analysis leads to the conclusion that the ADIA announcement of 15 January, had little if any impact on the gradual price decline trend that was being experienced. Indeed, it remains the opinion of the Board that an extension of the “reasonable test” would suggest that the average shareholder and investor does not know who ADIA is, what they represent, nor what if any impact they may have on the future of a company. This bears true when considering the share trades processed and the share price movement post the ADIA announcement, the optics of which is a continuation of an already established downward trend" When you announce adia a company in charge of $850 billion id giving lending ige $300 milion IT MATTERS. If it didn't matter why make sure you fixed the typo from $850 mil to $850 bil???? They wanted as much mileage out of this as possible. DD FACT ige MISINFORMED (at best) the market and are now trying to distance themselves from their own misinformation they provided to the asx.
Expand
they only write this so they can sate they don't feel they are 'automatically' liable for misinformation. If they say: sorry, we believed it, but did not enough to reasonably check, then they are likely 'automatically' liable. And if they are liable, but it did not move the SP, as they state, then is no loss to be liable for. Therefore they say they believe it did not move the SP