While I don’t share Aphid1000’s concerns regarding Bronwyn’s...

While I don’t share Aphid1000’s concerns regarding Bronwyn’s compensation — she’s done a solid job and deserves to be paid accordingly — I do think the transparency from Indiana is lacking in several key areas: 1. Why is the ATO process taking so long? Shareholders deserve a clear explanation. 2.The company’s cash position is never presented clearly. Just look at the amount of speculation in this chat — it reflects how little clarity there is around what cash actually belongs to shareholders. 3. The quality of the exploration assets is questionable. It doesn’t feel like we own a strong project, and Indiana seems unwilling to reassess. The current exploration "strategy" sometimes seems geared more toward satisfying internal stakeholders than maximizing shareholder returns because there are plenty of discounted projects on the market that appear to offer much better value than green field exploration. 4. If there are any related-party transactions, they must be disclosed. A lack of disclosure and potential compliance issues directly undermine investor confidence and contributes to share price weakness. And finally, whether we like it or not, Aphid1000 question “Who is really running Indiana?” is a valid one.It’s important the company addresses these points directly and transparently.