Understand this simple concept and understand why he acts the...

Understand this simple concept and understand why he acts the way he does.

The CEO controls 100% of the company with only 50% of the shares.

Why do a buy back and make it private?
To what gain?
This does not benefit the controlling shareholder. He has to outlay funds to obtain that remaining 50% when he can get 50% + through other legal means a slice of the remaining 50%.

If things dont work out, he already cash cash on the side, because he drained the cash pre-IPO.

In regards to those contacts he 'gave away' shares in. You can bet there was some side deal going on.

I am not privy to those side deals, but i come across them regularly in my commercial dealings.

yes there is $30 odd million in the bank account. But although not legall ownerhsip, he has control ownership.
So the decision over this money is his through control.

If he is feeling at bit poor, he can do a dividend (but the tax effect will be heavy, and nobody has bothered to go through the tax effect of dividend distribution for the point of view of the CEO, not Australia based shareholders).

If a good business opportunity comes up, then he can use company money (of which he is exposed by only 50%).

Conclusion:
The market radically underestimated the extent to which he would control the company as his own private company.