diamond news, page-3696

Those of us who watch stuff like that, Director holdings and share movements, we're all well aware of what is 'revealed' in the article. Storm in a tea-cup, those sales were reported at the time and the explanation was that they were sales to meet tax liabilities which came with 'free' performance shares that were issued to the various parties. I think the contributor is being a little disingenuous, or just hasn't done enough homework, or maybe he spoke to our PR Department on an off day and didn't like the response he got - just joking!

Sure, we would have liked it more if those holders had funded their tax liabilities from other sources, but not everyone has the wherewithal to suddenly find tens of thousands of dollars. Plus I haven't noticed any flagging enthusiasm from any of the gentlemen involved; I think we can safely ignore that out-of-date, regurgitated, information.

Here's an extract from the relevant announcement:

'In addition, Appendix 3Y notices attached for Lucapa board members Mr Kennedy, Mr Wetherall andMr Selby reflect the agreed sale of shares to meet immediate taxation liabilities associated with theexercise of vested Performance Rights. These shares were acquired by two major Lucapa shareholderswith consideration to a trading window within the Company’s Securities Trading Policy.'

Hardly a vote of no confidence. Let's move on and not be distracted by this nonsense.

B22.