Analyst, at least Cactus had good and funny examples. The Corps...

Analyst, at least Cactus had good and funny examples. The Corps Act isn’t an RG issued by ASIC as industry guidance! It’s binding and it’s got teeth. Market manipulation is a crime that carries 15 years’ gaol, according to the Corps Act. Is insider trading “ideological hocus pocus” too, or does s1043 count? How can us victimised retail whingers tell which clauses are the real deal and which are BS?
Or is it more likely that you are talking BS? That all clauses are real, the penalties stipulated are real and ASIC is simply not doing its job by picking and choosing which offences to enforce and which ones to turn a blind eye to?
Additionally, cast your mind back 12 months or so when some clever clogs was boasting on HC that they had multiple accounts and was manipulating the market when they felt like it. ASIC suddenly swung into action, the first time they had prosecuted anyone under this clause! I guess the market had never been manipulated before the arrival of Fibonarchery.

My point is, if what I am saying isn’t true, why haven’t I been arrested and awaiting prosecution for disseminating false financial information? Does ASIC really want the public’s attention drawn to an issue where they want as little scrutiny as possible? They know my defence would be that everything I said was true or I thought it to be true. A little different to the ASIC media release below.

https://asic.gov.au/about-asic/news-centre/find-a-media-release/2023-releases/23-116mr-**riel-govinda-sentenced-to-two-and-a-half-years-imprisonment-and-fined-for-market-manipulation-and-finfluencer-conduct/


Lastly, one thing that I have said previously that isn’t true is retail investors not being able to access the aftermarket. A friend was able to place a trade after 4pm today in a retail capacity, so that clearly is possible and not an issue. Apologies.