If this ends up in court, I think the court will be primarily...

First 38 Last

Share
Profile

Follow
aes411

1,632 Posts.

783

20/01/22

09:08

Post #: 58995979
Share

Originally posted by LongNWrong: ↑

OK thank you for being the only one to respond despite some others continually crowing about how they are going to sue OM and how they are to blame for this.

3 legit questions, (I'm not trolling honestly, you choose whether you believe that or not) responses.

1) Your first point is right, it's well addressed in the response and seems a fairly rudimentary boo boo by OM. However... does them getting all the perf shares or a third illegitimately of them really mean there's not an issue? The materiality reduces (quite a bit) but it's still a lot of shares that just scraped by the hurdle. (And yes to be clear this is only if the concerns are proven but even under the ISX version there are shares issued that satisfy the criteria) so a factual stuff up and a bit rookie maybe but enough to instigate this and provide cause to sue?

2) The second point is neither here nor there. Maybe it makes the report read a bit worse and maybe there's some (conscious or subconscious) bias there) but the possible implication (others could argue stating of facts) hardly causes a 2.5 year suspension or gives rise to a law suit.

3) JK (and others here) flat out referenced lies not omissions, I'm still trying to understand what these were.

Expand

If this ends up in court, I think the court will be primarily interested in the intent behind the report (whether malicious/illegal) and not so much the accuracy of the content. It will be up to ISX to prove that there was such intent but this may be hard to prove to the requisite level till discovery (as the ASX case has shown). No harm in trying though, if funds are available.

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

0 Great analysis

Reply