It isn't common practice, it is a legal requirement. See Note 36. If there had been a significant upturn or downturn in LAMP performance it would be required to be disclosed there. Likewise if they had had success between 30/6 and 29/9 in renegotiating the terms of the debt or securing another source of finance, as mentioned in Note 2, that would have been disclosed there too.
Look at it this way - if Q1 was going to be significantly better than Q4 FY16 then most of the comments in Note 2 about going concern issues could at least be discounted, if not eliminated, giving much more assurance for shareholders.
The auditors would definitely have reviewed production levels, costs, sales and cash flows for Q1 prior to signing off. If the numbers had been significantly worse than Q4, they would be liable if Q1 was a disaster and they had not drawn shareholders attention to it on 29th Sept.
I used to be an auditor, coincidentally for Ernst and Young (but not in Australia, or Malaysia).
Capital raising?, page-41
-
- There are more pages in this discussion • 97 more messages in this thread...
You’re viewing a single post only. To view the entire thread just sign in or Join Now (FREE)
Add LYC (ASX) to my watchlist
 (20min delay)
|
|||||
|
Last
$7.89 |
Change
-0.130(1.62%) |
Mkt cap ! $7.374B | |||
| Open | High | Low | Value | Volume |
| $7.97 | $8.02 | $7.86 | $27.21M | 3.442M |
Buyers (Bids)
| No. | Vol. | Price($) |
|---|---|---|
| 3 | 12329 | $7.86 |
Sellers (Offers)
| Price($) | Vol. | No. |
|---|---|---|
| $7.90 | 8744 | 2 |
View Market Depth
| Last trade - 16.10pm 01/10/2024 (20 minute delay) ? |
| LYC (ASX) Chart |