She didn't say it contains inaccuracies?
Go reread the transcript paragraph 48
She clearly states "although recognising the risk of reputational damage" in other words, IF there are inaccuracies they can be retracted, revised etc... this was in reference to explaining that even though the injunction won't be happening the SOR can be changed...ISX need to play by ASX rules. ASX provide the SOR and ISX can respond
Do you really think the majority of ISX clients give a rats about what ASX SOR states?
If the reputational damage is so great then respond to the SOR with facts, answer ASX responses, make them look stupid, defend your position?
Reputational damage is just ISX opinion, doesn't make it fact.
She didn't say it contains inaccuracies? Go reread the...
-
- There are more pages in this discussion • 15 more messages in this thread...
You’re viewing a single post only. To view the entire thread just sign in or Join Now (FREE)