Ann: Voluntary Suspension Extension Request, page-29

If that's what you really believe I would suggest that you don't have a very comprehensive knowledge of stocks listed on the ASX.

An unbiased examination of the performance of QBL/MCL management would, I believe, reveal that they have achieved a great deal in a very short time, and established the basis for a very successful company.

It has been a fair assumption since the first extension that there were several parties involved, and that possibly some of them might have been located in different jurisdictions. When you are dealing with more than one party, each time you make a change in the terms with party A, it can have a flow-on effect to party B and/or party C, and then if you change the terms with party B or C, you might then need to make another change with party A.

And please don't overlook the fact that it's not just the trading parties to the actual deals that are involved - the ASX is an overarching party which can over-ride changes which have been made among the trading parties, and then the whole process has to be revisited.

I used to work for a major international oil company, and this sort of thing is quite normal. It's how large-scale business is often done. I have no qualms about the delay in formalising this obviously complex negotiating process, and in fact the apparent complexity of it gives me greater hope that it could be a very major leap forward for QBL/MCL.