monkey some of what you say is fine BUT...the market doesn't...

monkey some of what you say is fine BUT...

the market doesn't believe this spin any more. The market doesn't rate this company nor management period. Hence the ever falling SP in spite of good assets, $147 POO, a bull market across all sectors particularly oil and gas etc. etc

Rather than work thru each of your points yet again just to refute them with the facts here's just 2.

1. Quote: "and management can't be criticised for acting in the interests of shareholders and obtaining independent advice with respect to the strategic direction of the Company."

And then they IGNORE it. End of story. Why pay for costly advice (Strategic Reviews) only to turn around and do the opposite based on further advice that might be construed as being somewhat conflicted. Ie those suggesting hugely dilutionary placements… brokers? Insto’s? Who led AMU management to the new insto’s? Was it a broker who led them on the OS roadshow? lol

2. However you bat around the accounting vagaries of ARW (and yeah we all know what was done) one point remains it was a $250m Co that now trades at 1.7c.
AMU's peak SP directly coincided with ARW's 3 YEARS AGO!!!!!.

Neither you nor management have ever explained how so much money (shareholders funds) was wasted or lost on the "lets conquer the US" play before the Aust op's were up and running let alone producing cashflow.

There have been many theories/accusations about how the US got so out of hand and how it appears the board (including at least 2 of the 3 directors you now proclaim) managed to oversee this in such a spectacularly unsuccessful manner. If the claims are to be believed it appears some may have managed to get out relatively unscathed while shareholders of both ARW and by extension AMU were left with empty shells, lots of unanswered questions and a market sentiment that appears to have turned grossly sour on a dime at the same time.
Why? What exactly happened in the US? How did management get that SO wrong. And why hasn’t anyone other than shareholders ever paid for it?
They’re questions that no doubt won’t get answered. But clearly the market as a whole made its determination of AMU at that time and isn’t willing to review it.

Point is 3 years on the market clearly hasn't forgotten nor forgiven. So how is that going to change?
Appears the market and at least some significant shareholders believe only major change at the top will exorcise these past failures.

Generally speaking, whatever the reason for the gross undervaluing of any Co. whether due to market disinterest, at one end of the spectrum or distrust at the other, one point remains it won’t right itself without ACTION.

Some might argue that Good Companies deal with these issues instead of undertaking another soon to be ignored review, another value destroying buyback or even issuing more shares hoping to extend their own longevity.