The sad thing for holders, is it doesn't matter if CLZ is...

The sad thing for holders, is it doesn't matter if CLZ is successful or not. For example, my shareholding has been reduced from 60,000 to 5 shares, which cost $500 originally, presently worth 2 cents or 1.5 cents more precisely. So the share price would need to go to $100 for me to get my money back. Even with only 900 million shares, it might need to be worth what BHP is worth. Such is the dramatic compound effect of the two huge consolidations. The damage that was done via the consolidations, cealled the fate of all current shareholders.

So to make any money and benefit, you must buy in before the 'amazing' announcement is made, But the conundrum is if you do hold, you risk a consolidation, being dropped on you & your shareholding number being smashed to oblivion.

They have exposed some significant holes in the ASX/& SC law.

I believe it likely, that someone with experience in another jurisdiction ( that is another country's stock market) looked at the ASX rules & realized this. Perhaps My Lester might be able to enlighten us in this regard. Also, perhaps someone who realized the potential derivative effect consolidations have on share values- especially when several are combined. One needs a doctorate in mathematics to understand this sting. but in 34 years, i have never seen anything like it.
When you put a 150 /1 consolidation with a 50/1 consolidation, you get a multiplier effect of 7500 devaluation in stock unit numbers.
The two consolidations combined with the ongoing continual strategy of issuing shares, below market prices, completely undermined the share price. They were issuing shares off the market at prices of half a tenth of a cent(.005) & telling subscribers to go to market & make a profit out of "bunny" new shareholders. So what they effectively did was create a secondary market, by issuing shares to non-ASX participants, then directing them to sell on the market. But what is the limit to this behavior? Nothing of any value was being created.

The problem for shareholders, under ASX rules they may not have been doing anything wrong. That's why we have been hammering on, not to invest in them - because the game was effectively rigged against shareholders. It is the ASX / C&SC that have allowed investors to lose, what is likely hundreds of millions of dollars on this company.
CLZ reports 92 million dollars in accumulated losses. Quite possibly many multiples of this have been lost by people who bought the shares on-market and sold them at a loss. What these losses are precisely - goodness knows.
There is way enough there in unusual dealing to suspend it pending an inquiry .