daveyb1I can't speak for your experience, but I do have a...

daveyb1

I can't speak for your experience, but I do have a different take. In fairness to ASIC if they are given reasonable facts about legitimate concerns, and the facts point to unreasonable activities/holdups, or potential illegal activities such as maybe attempted fraud on investors, and they are corroborated (or capable of being corroborated) by others - then ASIC can and will likely act.

A cursory Google search finds a recent case in point (I stress this example is UNRELATED to Metal Storm) but nicely shows the process can and does work sometimes. The link is only a couple of days ago, where ASIC are currently attempting to oust a (I also stress different) liquidator:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-05-05/asic-in-fresh-push-to-oust-walton-liquidator/5429450

What this story reveals is an indication of the type of poor behaviour (including seemingly long delays and dodgy background transactions) in Company windups that can and DOES attract ASIC's attention. Hmmm.

I have previously suggested that people with Metal Storm concerns over the Administration period (since July/August 2012) should definitely bring their own thoughts and experiences to ASIC's attention now. Such expressed collective concerns can then usefully support an ASIC perception that parts of the old MST investment community are indeed rightly concerned about fairness being seen to be done in a Company failure such as Metal Storm.