continuous disclosure or ...................

The corporations Act provides specific rules on continuous disclosure. The rules are there to protect shareholders.

The rules whilst specific are subjective in determination.

How can one think that something is not amiss when there is a placement and the price fluctuates as it has (32.5% from 2 day high to low) – just go back to previous placements and look for similar correlation

The appendix 3B’s are not specific enough – more money to acquire shares in Fortitude - how much? Script or cash? What was disclosed to the subscriber that was not disclosed to the market a large?

If it all go’s pear shaped (sorry further pear shaped, or perhaps pureed), then it is no use having a winge unless you are keen to test the veracity of our Corporations Act. One does not need to do it on ones own provided the purported financial loss is substantial enough (of the Class).

Our markets are regulated for a reason…………….

PS – I do hope the Auditors take due care in signing off the audit report re the 2008 Stat accounts – one would be very surprised if it was not qualified. The related party disclosure note will also make interesting reading.

Thanks

BA