Ann: May 2017 Operational Update, page-157

I don't understand what you are saying - which us entity? (Corletts entity?)
Based again on the company ANNs, facts (list of subsidiaries and ownership %s)

So, based on ANNs IOT US sells to the North American Retailers
$1 comes in, P&L will reflect IOT US costs, and then there will say 50c profit. while it says IOT US is the selling entity, I haven't seen that IOT US is buying entity from AEE, or what the inter-co pricing between IOT AUS and IOT US is ....and wouldn't expect that until half yearly. So, of that US sourced profit, IOT Aus gets 70%, its P&L will have costs, and the shareholders of the IOT aust listed legal entity own whats left after that......
30% of IOT US profit (retained earnings/dividends) is "owned" by Corletts legal entity.
The ownership is detail in IOT Financial Reports, its not being made up by Warnie

I say owned loosely in a non accounting sense, but practically the IOT US has to be pay out equal dividends per share to all shareholders (typically). So I don't think Warnie has said anything that isn't correct.

Accounting wise IOT AUST will consolidated the whole P&L, and then back out minority interest share of profit (I have done similar accounting for a number of large listed entities with similar structures). I don't believe there is any way to decide whether old or new structure / model is better for shareholders....given almost no rev (2k to date), no profit and no detail on costs, and apportionment versus commission %s etc....so no data to model what the costs are (fixed and variable) or margin impacts