The management's excuses for not allowing Biota to dual list on ASX: complexity of maintaining two accounting and reporting standards, and trading on ASX could drag on trading on Nasdaq.
The question now is that "is it really because of these two reasons why they decided to delist Biota from ASX?".
At least I do not believe that it is these two reasons that made them decide to delist Biota from ASX. My thought is that the real reasons for delisting Biota from ASX were the treatment of those Un-vested free share options, and making this merger deal a legally takeover of Biota holdings by Nabi. The memebers of compensation committee do not have much vested interest in the total company's wealth, how can we trust them to make decisions that are benefitial to the shareholders as a whole? For example, if Paul Bell,the Chairman of the Compensaton Committee owned 50% of Biota, would he still have allowed so many free share options being issued for free?
We should demand the management to explain why they decided to delist Biota from ASX. The above two excuses are really BS according to Biota's capital spending levels and Biota's srong shareholder support in Australia.
Do those people feel sorry or shamed for making poor decisions to cause massive loss of shareholders' wealth?
Just my thoughts.
BTA Price at posting:
0.0¢ Sentiment: None Disclosure: Not Held
