The cap raise at $4 was bought up by one company, fidelity, who...

The cap raise at $4 was bought up by one company, fidelity, who are not part of the class action.

From my understanding the CA scope is their announcements relating to fruitbox and fantastic furniture.... and gsw are denying they needed to announce they stopped using the software due to it being immaterial... maybe because the share price didn't react very much when they were initially announced? Or maybe the bigger newer agreements made them immaterial in relativity.

Also if you look at the CBA albert website and search the 'developer directory' you will see Getswift listed as a developer. Yes something dodgy did happen, but I wouldn't be quick to take the word of the honost, righteous, trustworthy saint speaking on behalf of the socially responsible Comm Bank.

I am bias as a holder. I know they did not do a good job with their announcements, but can it be argued that they made reasonable judgements in terms of delivery numbers based on what the customer told them? They made it clear N.A. gave them the annual delivery figure... but I'm not sure about the others.