"Shareholders had an opportunity to bring about change with a board spill."
Fair question, and happy to answer. Without discussing all the dynamics, do any of us know who, or even if there were any "really serious" candidates that were lined up to take over? I don't!
The best guess to answer, as I understand, and I might be wrong, is from an announcement. Didn't they say that they were interviewing two potential candidates and nothing more was heard?
What I think, must be at least considered, is; what would have been the outcome, in light of the performance of the Cannabis sector, then, (gosh, look at the mess now) if the Board did spill, hypothetically, and no one stepped up? I considered, as a shareholder, that the whole company could have been shut down, altogether. I stick by my decision.
"You "agitated" against that potential change as a long undetermined suspension would be damaging to shareholders."
I considered my opinion! I agitate in my letters to public company boards.
But to answer: I assessed and made a reasonable decision based on the facts I was aware of, or lack of facts, actually, from announcements at the time. I made a comment here and voiced a single opinion, I believe. I also base my assessment and decisions on my own experiences working with senior management teams, and the dangers that can occur to a company or investors when a Plan B is not evident, or in place. I stick by the comments and assessments I made at the time I was voting. It was proffered like a few of us were doing.
"Do you still hold the same views and opinions on that matter and the damage undetermined suspensions cause?"
Good question. Thanks for allowing me to clarify again.
"CGB is a very difficult stock to chat about in a positive way because of the two long suspensions and also, to some degree, the lack of information out there in the media. CGB has created its own nightmare with the constant tacking on the water and change of deals. Then to see those deals fall through. That has made the situation worse, no argument from me there!"
I do hold the same views, as seen in my comments above. I also haven't seen any ASX slap on the wrists yet as I have seen with some of these companies like SCU, and MDC which makes me wonder if the ASX is allowing this to happen for valid and genuine reasons. AC8 is also suspended longer than CGB but they don't seem to be offering shareholders hope in relisting, last I looked.
What do you think, from your experience with stocks, could be a reasonable explanation as to why the ASX, to date, have not slapped a "Please Explain" on CGB after being suspended this long, especially when other companies have been asked to explain, their paperwork during long suspensions like the two I have listed below? CGB has been very controversial and reported on as we have seen in posts here!
MDC:
https://hotcopper.com.au/threads/ann-response-to-asx-query.7297747/
SCU:
https://hotcopper.com.au/threads/ann-response-to-asx-query-letter.6614594/#.ZFHpSHZBxD8
