The legal problem facing BLK is to prove that these parties are acting together or colluding without having declared a combined interest, as I understand it. The Polo/JG case is that it is plausible for investors who may know each other and or have overlapping investment interests to also have coincidently similar views on corporate matters such as s249 notices. So, not sure the Panel can find the smoking gun - which is the evidence that these parties have arranged all of this to effect the spill.
Somewhere above a poster used the terms integrity and honesty. It would be nice if Polo was concerned about this situation because if you drill through the JG and Singapore connections several stories emerge concerning Merlin Diamonds, Arcadia and a raft of Oz gold companies which would make one reach for that cleft stick, to replace the rock and hope the smell goes away But I don't think the Panel will be doing current BLK Board any favors unfortunately.
TOV Price at posting:
0.0¢ Sentiment: None Disclosure: Unspecified
BLK Price at posting:
19.5¢ Sentiment: Hold Disclosure: Held
