"But same point. They are buying 20% for pittance. All because...

"But same point. They are buying 20% for pittance. All because our stewards were asleep at the old boy scout camp, when they knew / should have understood the potential of implications re Note - for allowing the 15% capacity to be dipped into to cover conversion beneath the floor 1.5c. Come default. That should never have been allowed to occur. And a rights issue should have been called there and then to repay the note. As soon as this dipped its toes below 1.5c that floor should never have been breached, and collateral shares frozen until the rights issue filled to prevent the default. No Vwap is we are halted ? "
So, should the board be put to the legal sword?

Raider