So another poster can ‘fill up the pages’ as you put it with unbridled optimism, red herrings and sleight of hand mistruths and that is ok? But someone that posts regularly with scepticism and glass half full views is not ok? Have I got this right?
If you go back through my posting history I have been outright critical and scathing of this company and missteps whilst being a holder for long periods.
Why should it make any difference now that I’m currently a non-holder?
I want this company to succeed but it’s an outright avoid for me until some critical boxes are ticked (starting with the new CEO resigning from another directorship on Monday) and SPL kicking a key near term critical goal.
If these things fail to materialise, I believe shareholders are looking at more of the same going forward and miserable share price performance.
