I have no doubt investors in Big Un, GetSwift and Blue Sky Alternatives were all claiming self interest, shorting and "leftist sensationalism" from the AFR when it ran exposes on their precious holdings as well.
I rate both Swami and the AFR, as well as other Twitter posters not scared to do a bit of digging. Blinkered groupthink, in which AVZ investors have been complicit for years now, is way more dangerous than a newspaper article pointing out failings of company management.
If I were still an AVZ holder, and if the stock were trading, and Tom's write up had just forced my either corrupt or incompetent management team to reveal the 2 bits of information management had intentionally held from investors, then I would be grateful and asking "is there anything to this which should force me to reassess my previously 1 eyed blinkered belief that AVZ was risk free"
And my conclusion would be yes, ... at which point I would sell down a bit to derisk, rather than continue to post like a bagholder, attack the journalist and call for legal proceedings against him.
The company need to give answers rather than the media back down on their write ups of what appears to be shady dealings.
Why are holders not angry at Nigel. He has led with lies, held back information due to his plainly wrong subjective opinion that it was without merit and has taken $3.2 million home as a yearly salary. way more damaging than 3 or 4 AFR write ups
Add to My Watchlist
What is My Watchlist?