Thanks koma .... my citing the issue of ‘going concern’ seems to have triggered a remarkable number of people and set off a cry to arms from a forum leader in the form of a post* apparently designed to distract from and deflect the point I had made (* a post which apparently told ‘everybody’ what ‘everybody’ knew already.)
The context (which I had thought was clear ) was that in the absence of solid news** I felt there was potential for the price to fall back in the long months ahead (**as assumed per CEO comment.)
I said I felt this was due to factors such as the US Election, other global issues, unstable top heavy markets , even Christmas, and more and that - in the event of a crash - I felt investors would flee to safe haven stocks.
I said I did not count BRN as a ‘safe haven’ in such event.
For this I was villified, sworn at, received a lecture (apparently based on the assumption my opinion BRN ‘not a safe haven in the event of market crash’ meant I was saying the company was doomed,) and may even have caused four heart attacks and made three old ladies faint.
I also found a few people who have not succumbed to whatever it is that is in the air around here.
Thank you kota and stones and slade for your civility
To everyone else I am sorry my criticisms of those who focused on only half the SMH story has caused you such collective grief.
I agree it may not matter what those analysts and the CEO said about timing and company valuation because that might not be how it works out.
(20min delay)