It seems you don't even have to be a tall poppy to get pulled...

It seems you don't even have to be a tall poppy to get pulled down.

Have you actually thought that Brent has held this job for decades and that is under GC. So what you are suggesting is that GC accepted that he had to put Brent into this position and let him not do a great job.

I know that Brent invested and worked with a listed company that I thought (I am not suggesting I am an analyst) was rubbish and it turned out a huge success. I suspect even GC made money on it. Don't know if SEQ did but unlikely given the disclosures.

No Brent isn't a friend I met his once and he laid out the investment thesis on the stock ( Not SEQ) and I never agreed with him only to find the share price way up.

Really just because someone has family or your own resources doesn't mean daddy gave it to you. Before you think I was born with a silver spoon think again. I would have respected GC if Brent had been whatever suspended /frog marched etc as people speculate before this S249.

Nothing that is being done now in the name of shareholders is improving the company's position.

I would love for shareholders to start asking questions of the auditor and maybe the new chairman around the pumped up announcements and how they turned out. I suspect no-one here knew we had an investment in shares process that doesn't seem to make money. How many other things are undisclosed.

I am trying to think back to when the first claim arose relating top a planner that SEQ had to try to recover the amount paid out from the planner and insurance. I remember asking when the Royal commission was on and being told it was immaterial and how good their systems were. I am far less convinced now.

I am astounded that not many here seem to really want to get to the bottom of how their company is being run. Almost at the point of buying some shares just so that I can ask written questions for the next AGM.