Australia's largest stock trading and investment forum Australia's #1 stock forum

SP1

Click for more information

0.00%

$1.07 southern cross payments ltd

Gadens Lawyers investigating possible class action against ISX, page-10

First 10 Last

Share
Profile

Follow
gattertop

490 Posts.

490

25/01/20

11:48

Post #: 42570238
Share

Originally posted by Dineen: ↑

You'd wonder whether an ISX shareholder contacted them or whether Gadens are merely 'fishing' for business after reading e.g. the SMH article yesterday, learning of the hearing etc...or whether someone has 'tipped them off' as part of the 'campaign' against ISX. All conjecture of course.
>>>
It would be interesting to know whether Gadens would consider a class action against ASX on behalf of ISX shareholders. Perhaps some of us [ISX buy holders] should email Gadens and explain the action we would like taken against the ASX and also given the impact and consequent malicious/fallacious reporting from the media. Pivotal to our concerns is the fact that ASX have not explained to ISX shareholders why ISX has been suspended. Might balance out the claims some - or none - have made to date to Gadens. We certainly have compiled enough evidence for Gadens to review.
>>>
Another very important fact is - most holders are in profit even during suspension. There may have been some day traders, late buyers and many short sellers burnt during some volatile trading - some short holders/or 'bought on credit' buyers who no doubt have been hurt and worried by the suspension.

If you actually view ISX's daily trading SP price - high/low - [ASX website] there were very few days when there was volatility after the initial impact of the release of the OM report and the subsequent damaging [inaccurate] articles printed by 9EC's media. I certainly cannot find any evidence that anyone was encouraging 'new' ISX shareholders to buy in the weeks prior to 10 Sept and up to 2 Oct 2019. The 'newer' buyers need to take responsibility for their decision to buy. As for those who may have been encouraged to sell short - ultimately is was your decision. [Note - HC poster sentiments are the sentiments of the holders. Not directives to buy/sell or hold.]
>>>
ISX's revised guidance for 2019 is mentioned in an ASX announcement very late in December 2019 (once known) and we know that ASX has been informed (as have we, the shareholders) that ASX are being held partly [or fully?] responsible for the impact/damage of ASX's unexplained suspension of trading. JK has formally and legally stated the ASX suspension has had a negative impact on revenue. He is lawyer himself so would not have made that claim without evidence/proof or 3rd party information. [Source: ASX announcements page].
>>>>>>
If my post is moderated, there is no information contained above that cannot be verified or found publicly - on HC or ASX or google. I will want reasons why this post is removed. I have noted any conjecture in bold above. Many non-holders have been permitted to say worse and their posts remain. The majority of my post can be found, publicly viewed and evidenced by visiting the ASX website for ISX announcements.

It is interesting to see that CK's article of yesterday is allowed to be reproduced and viewed in full on the HC ISX site. If CKruger wasn't a journalist and was an HC poster - his post would/should have been deleted from HC given the malicious and false reporting. Yet there CK's article remains forever - in print and online and on HC despite ISX having to formally notify many of the article's untruthful/unlawful content [reference - ASX ISX announcement 23 Jan 2020].

Expand

Hi Dineen. In a purely hypothetical context I am interested in this topic. If ISX are successful in the procedural fairness claim I think the court will also find that the ASX lacked a legitimate reason for the suspension. That being the case, would it not follow that shareholders would have a legitimate claim against the ASX? We know from company announcements that the suspension has moderated growth. Given the multiple that ISX traded on pre-suspension the theoretical ‘loss’ could be significant. It’s not unreasonable to also assume that some holders have experienced financial stress from having capital locked up. Did the ASX have a responsibility to consider the impact on shareholders when enacting the suspension? Given that impact was foreseeable does it follow that the ASX should have ensured the suspension was justified? Particularly so given the seeming open ended nature.

Obviously the above is just my opinion.

ISX Price at posting: $1.07 Sentiment: Buy Disclosure: Held
38 Upvote

3 Great analysis

Reply

Top Stories

ACW

Actinogen Medical ramps up Alzheimer’s treatment trials, targeting fast-track global approvals

Week 39 Wrap: What HotCopper’s watching; China’s new stimmy moves boost metals; Oz CPI drop

DEG

HotCopper users muse on De Grey's denial of Agnico Eagle takeover bid – but who are Agnico?

ESR

Estrella first foreign entity to win tenements in Timor-Leste under new laws ahead of 2025 tenders

KAL

KalGold rolls out detailed aeromagnetic survey across Pinjin project

The winners & losers on market if negative gearing were gone

COD

Coda Minerals (ASX:COD) enters rights issue to further exploration in South Australia

STK

5.6g/t gold intercept at Serbia's Rogozna supports Strickland's hopes for high-grade core

NAM

ACCC seeks Olam divestments before it can buy Namoi Cotton

The market's shrugged at China's stimulus measures all year. Why is this one different?

There are more pages in this discussion • 93 more messages in this thread...

First 10 Last

Add SP1 (ASX) to my watchlist