@Irishmist – Appreciate your thoughtful post and totally get...

@Irishmist – Appreciate your thoughtful post and totally get where you’re coming from. Just to clarify, I’m definitely not brushing over the litigation funding issue — far from it. I’ve actually discussed it at length before, and I fully agree it’s a key factor in how this plays out.

But here’s how I see it:

My understanding is that a significant chunk of the costs has already been covered — particularly the big-ticket work of preparing and lodging the claim, which is often the most resource-intensive phase. Now that we’re in quantum assessment, a lot of the groundwork has been laid.

Also, if CMD is actively negotiating or open to a settlement, locking into litigation funding right now could limit flexibility or reduce negotiating power. Once a funder is on board, they usually have a contractual say in how a claim proceeds — including settlement terms. So it might be in the company’s interest to hold off until they know whether that path is necessary.

And lastly, I’ve got full faith in the board here — these aren’t fly-by-nighters. They’re experienced, legally sharp, and importantly, they’re also top 20 shareholders themselves. Their incentives are aligned with ours — if they win, they win with us.

I completely respect your caution — it’s valid. But to me, the signs so far suggest CMD is handling this strategically. If they bring in funding later down the track, fine. If they secure a settlement beforehand, even better. Either way, I believe they’re playing the long game smartly.

Still bullish.