Hey Tastarga! I have developed a healthy respect for you based...

Hey Tastarga! I have developed a healthy respect for you based on your posts on this site (and the other one?) over the past year or so. However, I find myself disagreeing with you on AUM. You point the finger at ASX. However, surely the way it all works these days is to place the responsibility for proper reporting on the company, and particularly the competent person.

Its a bit like your tax return. You have the responsibility to report accurately. ATO can audit you. Similarly on the ASX. The company has the primary responsibility to report in accordance with JORC Code and ASX Listing Rules (which it demonstrably hasn't done) and the ASX has an audit/compliance role. Of course, (just like the ATO) their attention is drawn to a specific issue when the stock price behaves anomalously and the whistle blows. They may have been too late, but they did blow the whistle.

It was very interesting to view the ABC report this am. Wayne explained a dilemma he has which is understandable. However, I suggest that a better strategy if he really wanted to keep below XStrata's radar would have been NOT to publish an inferred resource of 59mt grading 2.04 Cu equivalent. There was absolutely NO pressure on him to release that. And I venture to suggest that if he hadn't, the stock would not have gone for the run, attracting the ASX, and in effect forcing him to release information that he doesn't want XStrata to have.

I repeat an earlier post that explains my position:

"You should be aware that the AusIMM and ASX have put an awful lot of effort into lifting reporting standards over the past 20 years or so, as you can see if you have a look at the JORC Code (see www.jorc.org) which provides detailed requirements as to how exploration companies should report. This Code was developed to avoid just the situation that has arisen here, and to protect the interests of shareholders by ensuring appropriate reporting standards.

The JORC Code requires that statements relating to Exploration Results, Resources, or Reserves must be signed off by a Competent Person who takes responsibility for certifying in effect that the statement is in compliance with the JORC Code as required by the ASX Listing Rules.

What seems to have happened here is that the company, for whatever reason, has chosen to release results that clearly do not comply with the JORC Code.

One simple example. The JORC Code prohibits the use of the term ore (or orebody, or ore reserves) for Exploration Results or Resources, since the term ore specifically can only apply to that part of the resource that can be economically extracted. However, the AUM announcement of 29 June refers to the mineralisation as being "an orebody" which is a clear and specific breach of JORC Code and ASX Listing Rules.

A Competent Person who signs a document that is in breach of the JORC Code may be held to account by the AusIMM. It is in everybody's interests that companies comply with the Code.

It is not as if this issue has not been widely discussed, and promulgated. What is surprising is that companies behave in a fashion that is not compliant with clear standards.

Yes, the ASX has a role to police the Listing Rules, but so do the companies have a responsibility to ensure that they comply with Listing Rules, which means comply with JORC Code."

While these processes designed to ensure that companies comply with the Listing Rules may be frustrating, fact is, those rules are there to protect us punters.

What would you rather have? Go back to the "good old days" when unscrupulous promoters could make any wild statement causing havoc in the markets? Or do you want a regulatory framework that makes it tough for promoters to make unsupportable statements that don't comply with the Listing Rules.

For mine, I'll take the latter. Perhaps ASX was a bit slow, but their system of compliance specifically sheets home the responsibility for sound reporting to the directors of the company, and the responsible person. ASX does after the fact review to check that the directors and the competent person have done their job.

Given that there is a speccie boom on, it may be that ASX is making an example of AUM to send a signal to all juniors that you better comply with the JORC Code in your reporting (and Listing Rules) or else.

I promise you, ASX is not the villain here.

And nor am I saying that Wayne doesn't have what he claims to have. The signals seem to me to say that this IS one of the best discoveries for while. But Wayne must realise that he has to comply with the rules, or he will get into this sort of strife.

ASX is trying to protect the interests of people like us. It doesn't help to pour s..t on them.