it's just the beginning for Cirralto!, page-11187

Just for the record , the reference was never intended to be an insult so I personally won't be apologizing to anyone. Floate himself used the reference to ' Punting Stock ' verses 'Portfolio Stock ' , and I believe ' Punting ' or gambling is clearly synonymous with the various forms of punting and the use of the word ' Mug '

So would you consider and ask the question as to the fact that some potentially higher quality Institutional and instrumental broker support PLUS related party holdings have vacated the register leaving the Top 20 weaker ....and whether these moves should be interpreted or considered as being more or less Portfolio over say Punter status I would have think it would be the former because Cirralto is far from being what I would call a ' Portfolio Stock ' .

And I'm not trying to read into anything as I am only posting the factual difference in the numbers. To me they are significant in a number of ways which I think you and a few others are missing entirely at least one of the key points of difference here.

And that is that he ( Floate ) went out on a limb to publicly state the on boarding of Institutional Investors to the register .....but couldn't name them because they don't exceed the mandatory reporting level of 5% or above. So he specifically made a big deal of this ........ALL the while there were at least 2 connected Institutional Top 20 and one who had been being proposed as a future Director of the Company ALL leaving the Top 20 at the same time.

So now not only is the current Top 20 is almost 5% shy of it's previous level of over 19% , it is also apparently a lot weaker and thinner in the bottom half of those same Top 20.

In addition to these observations , I cannot see any evidence of anyone being added who is all that more significant stature being represented in the current Top 20 and in fact they look to be considerably weaker in my opinion.

But the key point here is how it looks to me when an MD craps on about how important a feature of the last raise was in on boarding 3 Institutions while at the very same time at least 3 key ones had left. And I believe that an Investor with any rationale whatsoever can see that this just doesn't sit right and looks to be somewhat misleading given the amount of time he spent trying to justify the raising and the addition of 3 new Institutional Investors.