What a challenging post @itzgr82balive. ...... The questions you pose and the sceptical doubt you use to question the validity of your logic are truly boggling.
My expertise is nothing. I cannot claim to be any authority on logic. Yet logic is simple and yours satisfies reasonable inductive reasoning. However, all logic is founded on assumptions/premisses and as such the assumptions are what is questionable.
That ASX could hold such assumptions is unreasonable. To use such assumptions to maintain suspension is specious and obtuse. So these should be discarded and a search be made for new assumptions that are reasonable.
In Part 1. you raise 3 points of interest. The first is a statement of fact. The PSs were part of the agreement of seed-funding from Otis Energy and Red 5. Otis Energy (ASX:OTE) changed its name to ISignThis (ASX:ISX)
Otis Energy (ASX:OTE) has changed its name to iSignthis (ASX:ISX) reflecting its move to acquire Australian online identification and payment authentication provider iSignthis.
It is paying 298,333,333 shares priced at $0.03 and 336,666,667 rights for iSignthis. .......
The company has raised $3 million through a placement of shares to institutional and high net worth investors.
The shares were voted on by SHs and passed and the ASX was informed and allowed. They were thus compliant with ASX Listing Rules (31/12/2014). This latter is an assumption based on the announcement made on that date to that effect. Therefore the first point can be discounted.
The Second Point is pending at some future time and the Third Point is moot as there is no reasonable grounds to assume that such will occur.
Having said that, ASX's conduct in the matter of ISX has the appearance of being unreasonable to the extent that all unreasonable actions must be considered a possibility. However, the probability of such actions must be considered as low due to the unreasonable nature of such.
Part 2. relates to the legal abilities of a) ASX to demand such information, b) ISX's ability to conform to such demand, and c), and thus is, imo, the very crux of the matter, is it reasonable for ASX to make such a demand considering the legalities. This then provides the grounds to question the motives of ASX in making such a demand.
I cannot respond to this Part as it is beyond my knowledge and doesn't involve logic. It raises spectral questions, imo, which are better answered by your good self, as a "learned friend", and others.
I make no claim to be any kind of expert in logic and others will no doubt point to errors I've made. Yet logic is simple in principle yet complex in nature.
In writing this, I've researched several articles which readers might find more than i. This link https://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20150303/pdf/42x0xm8typ70mn.pdf is especially important as it relates the transition from OTE to ISX. In essence OTE, ISX(BVI) and ISX are all one and the same, Red5 was related to JK. As such all co.s had continuous communications.
The real question here relating to the PSs is the revenue that enable the allocation. This is, imo, the only reasonable ground on which ASX could build a case.
cheers and thanks for the stimulation, Scott.
ISX Price at posting:
$1.07 Sentiment: Buy Disclosure: Held
