That is a thoroughly incorrect view in my opinion.
Bird Cameron would open themselves up for all sorts of legal issues if they produced an IER that was not actually independent. Irrespective of what they were told by the Directors (and we don't know if that actually happened) Bird Cameron would have undertaken their 'due diligence' while doing the IER and they would have verified what they were told (had they been told anything). That is the whole point behind an IER.
To imply the opposite, as you have done, is speculation and questions the very basis of the IER and in doing so - Bird Cameron. It is classic 2+2=6 type stuff.
This is where speculation like this must be challenged. If, for no other reason (other than obvious ethical considerations), than to ensure that those who read these posts are not so mislead.
Facts are always better than speculation.
I took the time read your post and the attachment and I can find no evidence (and have demonstrated such) to substantiate your earlier claim re the apparently misleading 'prospectus'.
You said you had more - if I had the time. Well yes ... as it happens ... I do ... what's next please?
Thanks.
TV2 Price at posting:
1.7¢ Sentiment: Buy Disclosure: Held
