“naturally a management team [that has 100s million of dollars...

“naturally a management team [that has 100s million of dollars on the line] will rebuttal an allegation if its is [false]”

Sure could, but we could speculate and place any allegation into that sentence for the sake of an argument - right. Thankfully there are provisions within our legal system that dictate that an entity is innocent until proven guilty. So on the basis of this principle alone, your speculation holds zero weight. For instance, I could insinuate you are a paid lacky for vested interests and here only to raise doubt in the minds of investors or potential future investors - but that would be meaningless unless I had evidence. But if you quack like a lacky duck, talk like a duck.... then maybe you are a lacky duck.

In the end, all you have is a set of uninformed highly speculative conclusions based on a partial set of data and without any insight to the facts, which remain closely guarded by ASX. Your insinuations are founded on what has happened in the past (to you) under what appear to be similar circumstances, but because you are not in possession of the facts, you have a natural bias and consequently an inaccurate perspective. You can't even say you've used an average of meaningful data points to derive a statistically relevant conclusion. It much closer to a coin flip approach.