"How come the share price isin;t getting crucified?"Let's put...

"How come the share price isin;t getting crucified?"

Let's put some figures on it.

Let us suppose that the mistakes were actually also reflected in the bottom line. They would amount to:
5,070,131 - 2,497,269 + 637,700 - 74,517 = $3,136,045

Compare to MC @ $0.042 x 1,528,045,654 = $64.17M (yesterday's close).

The MC reflects the value the market is placing on a company on the basis of it's NTA, plus discounted future earnings. In the case of BLG, projections of future earnings are really just guesswork, so another way of viewing the MC is the value the market is placing on the company's IP (plus NTA).

So if the SP dropped to reflect a $3.14M fall in NTA, then we could expect the SP to fall by:

3.14/64.17 x 100 = 5%

In round figures that would be a fall of 0.2c/share, which is less than the trading range most days. At one point early on the SP was actually down this amount, to $0.040, but soon recovered back to $0.042. In the end it closed at $0.041, on what was a very thin trading day, at the end of a very red trading week on the ASX.

So was the early fall in SP a reflection of an incorrect assumption (as calculated above)? Well, given that the expected movement is within the average daily trading range (i.e. buried in trading 'noise'), no inference can be drawn. Even if there had been an actual $3.14M downward correction to NTA, and the market responded in a rational way, the SP would not get "crucified". In fact the price signal might be hard to see against the noise.

It pays to keep a cool head with these kinds of announcements.