Ann: Removal from Official List, page-97

@Basileus

It is not clear whether "I hope they relist and you can get some money back, as well as everyone else here who has lost money in this Cannabis sector mess" is a reference to the 'Cannabis Sector' of CGB or the listed Cannabis sector overall.

Regardless, the 'sector' is certainly in a mess whichever way you look at it. In addition to CGB standalone, the Cannabis sector of the ASX has been an almost complete flop (just look at MXC, AC8, CANN Group to name a few). Investors have lost large amounts of money.

Call the mention of this a red herring, furphy, or whatever you want. But it's not written above as an excuse to rationalize anything or be the sole reason for an outcome. It's just a fact.

"Q: How does the state of the "sector" prevent or restrict any company within that "sector" from issuing timely financial reports and company updates to its shareholders?"

This is a baiting question. We all know the answer - it does not (unless you're so broke you can't afford administration services.. but that's another matter).

Can you point us to where it was stated by Neil that the sector caused the inability for CGB to report or the absence of current CGB reporting though? I don't recall (though I could be wrong) Neil blaming the sector for the late issuance of reports and this question appears purposely written to lead readers towards that being the case.

Investors were already in massive losses throughout the listed Cannabis sector (97%+) before the latest CGB suspension & subsequent de-listing.

Now, that's not to suggest by any means that the management were not in part (or mostly, even) to blame or make light of the situation - we all agree on majority of the company facts here - but can you really make a point of 'balanced debate' whilst at the same writing something so leading?

It doesn't matter whether you like it or lump it - I know Neil has done more to try and keep the management of CGB accountable than ASIC. The government regulator who is supposed to be enforcing fiduciary responsibility for directors.