I cannot fathom that as a defence. Surely the ASX have...

I cannot fathom that as a defence. Surely the ASX have something else to rely on.

It appears ASX have planted the seed on all their defence and as you say, with the media.

The problem is they would’ve instructed all the negativity in the media yet they forgot to balance it out so it wasn’t so obvious.

No articles were written about any of the positive announcements from ISX. Everything was negative. Even after one positive announcement from ISX, the following day’s article was on JK’s supposed linkedin profile having incorrect info. How did that make media.

And they even mention Gaden’s looking into a class action. The only class action that was being considered was against ASX at the time. Didn’t one poster show how ASX use Gadens quite regularly.

The OM report was unsubstantiated and included no comment from the company so that wouldn’t have caused the market operator to place a company in suspension. From what I understand, the OM report’s biggest concern was performance shares and they were awarded over two years prior and without an issue (also noting the majority of shareholders had purchased post the performance shares and knew of the total share capital of the company).

Where is the evidence for the suspension for price volatility at 2 October 2020? Shouldn’t all their enquiries be external, it wasn’t ISX who caused the price volatility.

Not only after 11 months have the ASX done f’all to show who benefited from the massive turnover of shares and the attack on ISX just after 300 entry (the price volatility), it was evident after 4 query letters (probably the first 2 or 3 really) the ASX were not fishing in the price volatility pond, but rather in the ISX competitive threat ocean.

What an amazingly unbelievable poor defence.

‘Your honour, as you know the media are 100% accurate and unbiased, and we therefore rely on negative articles in the media to keep the company suspended for 11 months. And we didn’t know that keeping a company suspended for 11 months while in its growth phase would have a negative impact on the company, despite the company warning us in their interlocutory hearing to avoid the SOR being released. Therefore we cannot be held responsible. And yes, we have kept them in suspension even to this day, well, because there have been a couple more negative articles’. What a circus!