That was 14 months ago stickshift and NOTHING has been done. The criteria for inclusion is fraught with danger, yet, even the Australian government reckons that S&P ratings and shorting are "essential" to a "healthy" market. True. And many with whom I have communicated in the investment industry just reckon that "it's too hard" to change established practices. How patently obvious is someone like yourself, who is saving for their retirement, gets his money invested in a no income, no proven production process, no proven production cost and time line,company, yet, in the "prime" Index of the Australian market??? It's entirely the antithesis of what MUST be in superannuation funds. Granted, the percentage of those Index Funds would be significantly small and the actual impact on the overall Index value would probably be quite miniscule. But, it's the BASIC principle of Investing that is the issue. S&P are NOTORIOUS for crap ratings, THEY were one of the principal CAUSES of the GFC!!! What repercussions flowed to S&P's disasterous ratings mistakes?? ZILCH. Market caps are fine as a criterion, but, let's have proven, sustained Market Caps, with a MINIMUM of 5 years, before being eleigible for a Very important Index such as Australia's prime ASX200, even ASX300. Companies such as Lake in 2022, were "ordinary" AT BEST, and the "All Ords" was the most appropriate. My view on ratings is that the likes of LKE don't even come near an ASX200 Index until they've had at least 3 years of improving PROFIT, not just earnings. MINOR tinkering with the criteria would have enormous ramifications, 99% of which would favour GENUINE INVESTORS and most likely screw shorters and remove god given decisionsfor them, such as with LKE and MANY others.
P.S. And sorry dug, save you your usual retort, I don't take meds, anytime.
