The percentage of a revenue stream is an inappropriate...

First 206 Last

Share
Profile

Follow
Scott th Ratbag

41,943 Posts.

642

01/05/20

14:01

Post #: 44381351
Share

Originally posted by Warnie: ↑

The director of IMMO (one of the contracts) was signed by Pesek (sole director) 5 days after he had already resigned as sole director of said company?

Another contract was with a company that had only registered with ASIC 8 weeks prior, as an entity?

Another contract wasn't even signed by either party?

All these contract were same or very similar in nature and on each occasion the revenue simply dropped away once June 30 (preference share date) passed?

These contracts were material in nature as they were a fair percentage of the total revenue generated so from my understanding needed full market disclosure?

Yes one can finger point that the ASX didn't take earlier action but that is a bit contrite given ISX believe the contracts are all legitimate, if so then why would ASX have the need to take action earlier?

They do somewhat rely upon other professions such as auditors to do their job

Expand

The percentage of a revenue stream is an inappropriate measure... the $size of the contract is material. $50k of a Toal $100k is 50%... both small amounts and therefore not adequate to be 'material'.

I don't get what you're trying to say Warnie... none of your points are significant... and you first point reads like hhhmmmmm nothing factual?

Your last point is just so confused that its barely intelligible... "contrite"? I think you mean 'trite'

ISX Price at posting: $1.07 Sentiment: Hold Disclosure: Held
1 Upvote

0 Great analysis

Reply