Share
567 Posts.
lightbulb Created with Sketch. 114
clock Created with Sketch. 13/11/24
17:52
Share
Originally posted by fullylit:
↑
As a former listed mining company director, the Board's response to this is a bit of a joke. The disclosure rules if any shareholders care to read them, are very clear and you always err on the side of caution as I was advised by lawyers in the past. That's just a fact. Wether CE stays or goes is another issue but I don't see how the Board can possible say that they didn't consider it material to disclose in 22 or 23 when they knew more. It just doesn't wash. The market reaction proves it was VERY material to shareholders who have seen so much value destroyed. So any 'nothing to see here' story is complete rubbish. Corps law is very clear, you must at all times act in the best interests of ALL shareholders and allow the market to be FULLY informed on anything considered material. Clearly the MIN board has a different interpretation of material. I suspect that a deeper dive would actually uncover more. Current directors can keep pointing to it being 'historical', but that does NOT obviate the requirement of the Board to release market material information. If your MD is a tax cheat, how can you say that's not material ???? It doesn't pass the 'good fame and character' test. Read the rules, pretty simple.
Expand
Very well said.
(20min delay)