This is really a comical twist of events..... How can a...

This is really a comical twist of events.....
How can a London-based firm in Boatman Capital instruct Lawyers to "demand both the ASX and ASIC" investigate AVZ for allegedly misleading the market and failing to follow its disclosure obligations. Then to follow up with "Australia's regulators said it supported its statements".
If we are to believe this it is certain ASIC will be writing to AVZ Management imminently to provide a detailed chronology of events and commentary to the allegations. Not in a weeks time but demand an URGENT RESPONSE from AVZ Directors. Surely, The Boatman is not suggesting any action undertaken by ASIC doesn't need to be disclosed to the Market. ASIC will almost certainly request information from AVZ and demand a due date when AVZ Directors must submit its response.
The challenge to Boatman is to provide documentary evidence via Twitter or whatever social media platform it uses to directly confirm the Lawyers requested this of the Australian regulators. Without such, you will forever be seen as irrelevant.
Second, it is interesting that Boatman has asked this from the ASX and ASIC. I suggest whatever information and response that is actually produced is merely an attempt to discover pertinent details so that Chinese lawyers can be better armed with the facts of how AVZ come to pay for its interest in Manono and obtain registered court documents from the DRC. Such information maybe useful to assist Zijin in making a claim for a refund of the money it paid to DRC officials when in fact Zijin officials were trying to acquire an interest fraudulently through brown paper bags.
It is not hard to interpret the Boatman's motives when by his own actions he hasn't instructed his lawyers to write to Zijin Mining to explain why it didn't announce to the Chinese Exchange that it had acquired a 15% interest in the Manono project, but elected to publish this information only in its annual report. Surely Boatman, Zijin Mining has misled the Chinese share market and continues to do so in saying it legally acquired 15% in the project when reports out of the DRC confirm this was illegally and fraudulently transacted against the interests of the DRC.
Further, The Boatman asserts that he is aware Zijin Mining has received information advising of the date for the ICC hearing in April 2023. How did the Boatman come to this knowledge or is this simply Zijin lawyers stating it needs 6 months to provide the ICC Hearing with the necessary evidence to support its claims. IMO the Boatman has plucked a date out of his proverbial to create the impression he is receiving accurate communication from sources closely connected with the Chinese to influence the Australian market when in fact the date has no merit from the ICC. I hope the ASX and ASIC check this information through the appropriate Govt. channels and use this to prosecute AFR for misleading the public .

On another reported statement why would Ben Cohen talk to Financial Review reporter Tom Richardson when it is commonly known AVZ is only providing shareholders with limited progress reports on the reasoning behind our Trading suspension. Tom Richardson IMO you will soon learn your fate. I hope your Management team come calling for the facts and you have to disclose your sources and provide evidence to confirm your commentary. If your reporting turns out to be frivolous and false in misleading the market then I hope ASIC comes for you and the AFR and impose heavy sanctions.
AVZ management claims to have a 75% ownership in Manono and I believe the Announcements reported to ASIC and shareholders confirm this position.
AVZ Management will ensure its ownership of Manono will never drop below 51% if only to confirm it has the majority interest. The proposed 24% deal with CATH will not pass if any other ownership scenario as suggested by Boatman was to occur..