Peter Aardoom's statement makes reference to Jon Dixon being a...

Peter Aardoom's statement makes reference to Jon Dixon being a nominated director as opposed to Sulieman Ravell. Obviously he had prepared his statement weeks ago and nobody thought to proof read it before publication. One more reason you don't want these clowns running your company.

"The current board has been as open as possible with shareholders regarding recent regulatory challenges."

"Open as possible", you say? So you could have been more open but that wasn't possible because...?
Open as possible only with regard to recent regulatory challenges?
What about the other issues that shareholders would like you to be open about?
Were you open as possible with shareholders at the AGM held in Brisbane last November?
Are you open as possible with shareholders about the obvious conflicts of interest that exist within the consolidated group?
Are you open as possible with shareholders about why Stuart McAuliffe waffles on about "turnover" rather than profits?