Gupta house of cards and Bob ATO
Who knows the truth about any of those things, Gupta and Bob thats who, herein lies a problem, we are not provided with the full gammut of information and are expected to make a judgement.
Some shareholders are prevented from voicing their opinions, the company actively tries to prevent some shareholders from voting their shares. The company actively / even almost aggressively promotes a paticular side of the argument, to the point of phone calls after voting, and before the meeting, asking why did someone vote a particular way, how is any of this fair?
I dont buy this dinosaur controlling interest shareholder rhetoric, we buy into a company at a level we are comfortable with, why should someone be penalised ie. not able to vote, because they have too much control or too many shares, that is a bizarre concept.
Correct me if I am wrong, but if Chris Giles still stayed undecided as he had advised the board he was at the time ie. abstained voting his shareholding, and even if Bob abstained, this "deal" would have still been comprehensively rejected (36M for to 73M against) by the "minority" shareholders, so who do you blame then.
According to the board a shareholder with 200 shares should have the same voting power as someone with 2M shares, get a grip boys!, thats not how it works. Its time for you to move on!
HAV Price at posting:
13.5¢ Sentiment: Hold Disclosure: Held
A personalised tool to help users track selected stocks. Delivering real-time notifications on price updates, announcements, and performance stats on each to help make informed investment decisions.
(20min delay)