You are entitled to your opinion. Others are entitled to theirs.
You are entitled to thank Vintage for his insight and whatever profits that you think flows from that. However my guess is that asking him if he traded the stock (imo) would be like asking Mark Holden how to dance.
You can summarise the contentions however you like, the result is academic now. It was, in my opinion - a side show. The amount of money thrown at a legal campaign RARELY has anything to do with its voracity. The Intervener's and their contemporaries are in fact their own capitalist beast now. The problem they now have in this era is that that they HAVE to challenge these things. If they do not - their funding dries up as their supporters expect their defence on these matters.
And once they hand over to the lawyers, well...enough said. After learning the hard way with lawyers, I now take the line of "never ask your barber if you need a haircut."
The intervenors picked the wrong team and the wrong battle to show their colours.
Appeal as they may, the battle for now (under established rules & reg's set) is over. No nuanced postfacto justification will change this. And it will remain so until a decision goes in the opposite direction OR they change the rules.
To argue this is anathema to logic, although the attempts to explain it are getting quite comical.
To deny this is foolish.
To keep parroting on about the merits of the claim after its defeat eventually become even more shrill the more one persists with this line.
Whatever floats your boat Rae. If that has worked for you in the past and made you a quid, go with your instincts. If it hasn't...time to get your cues from some places that might make you some money.
Sincerely and also without rancour.
Gav
PEN Price at posting:
2.1¢ Sentiment: Buy Disclosure: Held
