You raise the point about what “facts” the AFR has written...

You raise the point about what “facts” the AFR has written about, but IMO the sensationalist style of writing that also needs consideration by a reader before reaching conclusions.

BirdoFPrey wrote an interesting analysis of what the facts/evidence are that have been provided in the last article see:
https://hotcopper.com.au/threads/another-afr-article.4039942/page-357?post_id=31496173#.Wpsvq2LZWEc

IMO RE had to go before this latest article, and I ask for ideas about who might replace him? If what was said about him on Friday is untrue the lawsuit against AFR will probably be settled out of court but involve a very public apology. If its true, IMO he has no place in a public company.

As for the rest of last Friday’s piece, was there anything in it that is material and not known prior thru the BIG ASX response letters?

Lumpy