Thanks for the tag
@Neil1959They should still have the list of shareholder contact data in which they previously have delivered AGM & other voting communications as a platform to provide updates (which I have previously been a recipient of). I will give the benefit of the doubt and assume they will use this for future updates.
CGB would still need to meet listing criteria again as far as I am aware, as any other new entrant to listing does. That would be as follows:
I believe they are going to have a problem meeting the 2000 shareholders at AU$2,000 holding requirement now based on the market capitalization. The spread of shareholders was provided by someone previously but I cannot locate right now.
I would not be surprised if the ASX further scrutinized the company because their only true tangible asset appears to be cash (at least, the lions share) although we cannot be certain with the absence of reporting. It is clear the profits test cannot be relied upon for listing admission. This is not going to be a quick process as management elude to, in my opinion. I expect it also requires another prospectus.
Even if they meet this criteria it's then going to be a 6 figure fee to relist unless, by some miracle, ASX decided to waiver and allow the readmission as a renewal only which I believe is just as likely as pigs flying.
Here's what the company would be in for:
So the question becomes, which is now worse - paying auditors an allegedly over-exorbitant fee and having retained listed status or having to go through the listing process again & pay 6 figures (or close to) anyway?
We all know the answer. The rationale behind the current predicament is someone only the internal management can and need to explain.
