"There is no reason basic financials can't be released unless...

"There is no reason basic financials can't be released unless you don't know how to explain the reason for investing in a left field business."

I'd probably adjust that a little to say "There is no reason either technically or legally basic financials can't be released"

They've used the excuse of being (in their opinion) 'overcharged' by their longstanding auditor (Nexia) to the tune of being more than double what they 'expected'.
So what is the actual figure here ??
There is a choice of TWO amounts here because they haven't stated the amount they 'expected' to be charged.

Historical expenses have been in the region of $250,000 p/a.

Therefore, the 1st choice available is that Nexia were going to charge them over $500,000 - yeah sure !
I'm pretty sure if that leaked out to Nexia's client base, it'd raise a lot of eyebrows - not a good look.

Then the 2nd choice available is CGB 'expected' to be charged circa $125,000 BUT Nexia were insisting on the regular fees which gives CGB the excuse to claim they were being charged over double what they expected.

Make sense ? I think choice #2 is the more likely.
After all, they're still in the Court Listing for non-payment to Medcan.
Also, they brought it to the wire recently for not submitting the Annual Listing Fee to the ASX in a timely manner.

Imo, it's all in what they think is clever wording which is what they pretty much always do.
What they don't seem to understand is 'you can fool some of the people some of the time, but, you can't fool all of the people all of the time'.

There's a regular quarterly due by the end of the week, but as quarterlies are often/mostly 'unaudited' I wouldn't hold my breath as to it's validity unless it can be qualified by ALL the missing reports.

Good for you in not being a holder
Best wishes
AE