"I wondered not that they were buying directly but had others...

"I wondered not that they were buying directly but had others buying for them to bring out of the closet at the opportune moment."

Yes, that's what I understood you were meaning. I should have made it clearer that they need to disclose all relevant interests in that Form 603 (i.e. both direct interests and also indirect interests that others are buying on their behalf). I guess it's possible that they might be tempted to do something shady, in an attempt to gain some kind of advantage, but I would be gobsmacked if they were dumb enough to put their entire campaign at risk - especially when there's someone as wily as AF who is part of the landscape. In short, from a forensic standpoint, that kind of stunt wouldn't be terribly difficult to trace back to the source if a disgruntled player engaged an suitably experienced expert to look into it.

I can't see AF selling for break-even. Though, I have been wrong before... back in 2014, I think. (wukka, wukka)