Ann: Update on ASX Listing, page-265

Again you're pointing to things that wont matter if AVZ are screwed.
If we're screwed, then we're screwed.

But you're suggesting Locke's fees will be some kind of detrimental thing?

And I said that IF they choose to fund AVZ, then from their point of view, AVZ are very likely to succeed,
IF AVZ succeed, they will be rolling in $billions, and Locke's fees although expensive, will be a pittance, who cares, it's irrelevant, you're making up fake stuff to frighten people, how are investors "smashed" if we're rolling in billions after a win? Because Locke took a tens of millions in fees?

If AVZ lose, well it's all extremerly bad and who cares about Locke's fees then.

But here's something you seemed to have sneaked into your reasoning pehaps hoping to get away with it...
Exactly where are you getting this info from taht Locke will be granted a "large portion" of AVZ ownership, or any portion at all for that matter?

Perhaps I'm wrong and you can demonstrate a past example of when a litigation funding company demanded ownership in return for a loan?