WOW!!! This is an unbelievable revelation!!! I am continually...

WOW!!!

This is an unbelievable revelation!!! I am continually surprised and angered when I read about this kind of behavior.

So is this how the board and DV have acted in the best interests of us shareholders? What more does ASIC need!?!?!!? How many other skeletons are there that destroyed our near $1b company?

From my perspective this is starting to smell of misleading and deceptive conduct. We were made to believe that no one was interested in our assets when nothing could be further from the truth. We had a binding offer at 5.7c!!!

If this is true, people need to go to jail! I've lost an absolute fortune on this company and I accept that the sharemarket is a risky proposition, but if the details of The Australian article are spot on, I didn't expect to be lied to by the people that were supposedly the stewards of our company and entrusted to look after our interests.

So if I understand all this correctly, we had a binding offer of 5.7c, then coincidentally a non-binding offer of 5.3c from SGH was received at around the same time, and then within a short period we are led to believe that there was no firm interest, our company is in dire straits and we should accept a 2c offer. Let's be clear here - our company was in play and they wanted us to sell our company for next to nothing.

I liken what I have read in that article to a real estate agent telling the seller of the property that no one is interested in the property and recommending a price lower than what other bidders had offered on the property. I don't know what the real estate laws are like these days, but I would imagine that a real estate agent would probably go to jail and/or never be allowed to work again.

So how can it be acceptable for directors and senior management, who have an equal or greater duty of care, to do the same to the owners of a company. If the directors and senior management are found to have been negligent and acted in a misleading and deceptive manner, do we have a claim against the company, its directors and managers and the company's indemnity insurance?

Surely, the DOCA could now not be allowed to proceed. I thought I read somewhere that one of the conditions was that shareholders would no longer be allowed to claim against the company. How could ASIC and/or the courts allow that?

This is absolutely disgraceful. Even if the details of the offer were confidential, when I read the reports out of McGrathNicol I never read any statements that there had been serious interest in our company's assets. I always found this very strange given the number of times we were told to hand money over because our company held world class assets!

Great work by all involved. I don't know what lies ahead here, but this case should set the precedent to ensure that shareholders can no longer be blatantly shafted!

Thanks,

Rob