The "facts" noted in this post are so obvious that one is left to wonder as to the relevance of this post?
"
Fact- All acquisitions must be in compliance with ASX rules & regulations."
Umm ... yes. Well done! However, we managed to figure that out without too much assistance.
Irrespective, QBL are not, at this time, in compliance with the listing rules (their words).
I think that is the fact that you ought to be posting about. Maybe?
QBL are not compliant!
QBL has been prevented from releasing their announcement by the ASX!
Acquisition? QBL claims to have made one. What have they acquired? What are the terms? What was the consideration (shares or cash or both)?
By way of reference, PDY claimed to have sourced infrastructure funding in 2014. Then ... well ... we all know how that story concluded. If you missed it - many shareholders lost their funds.
"
Padbury had flagged a $2 million raising last March, to Chinese investor Du Yong Yi, but told shareholders in its annual report it had raised the total to $4.8 million by issuing shares to associates of Mr Du and Hong Kong-registered Zhongying Property Development Company."
Issuing shares or CN's is common practice. Thing is, there are listing rules and legislation governing how many shares can be issued without shareholder approval.
Irrespective, until we see the detail many here are no more qualified to comment on this than is my neighbour's senile cat!
"
Simple as that folks."
I disagree and the facts afford that conclusion.
If, it was that simple "
folks", the announcement regarding this "significant" acquisition would have been out by now. I would argue that this current situation is far from easy.
