@@lmckenzie2 I explained my motives. Perspective is particularly...

@

@lmckenzie2 I explained my motives. Perspective is particularly important, each shareholder based on his/her reasons for holding can weigh up what is relevant for them.

In regards to shareholders, there's a lot of them, I don't assume to know the best interest of shareholders or whether shareholders know what's their best interests. Or simply that shareholders are a collective unity.

If you didn't hold in 2018, you may not like my topic.
There are some who held in 2018, and even then they may have different reasons for investing not related to my optic.

But i do believe there is a subset of shareholders who relied on AVZ announcements and that my research is of great interest to them.

There is a Public interest matter and at a jurisdictional level as well. Think for a moment, AVZ has never published the Dathcom JV company serial number. CD/LSH//RCCM/19-B-00935 prior to suspension. At best it has only published that Dathcom changed from SAS to SA (August 16 2019) and it delayed telling shareholders that too in a clear way until October 28 2019. I think it's in the best interest of shareholders, that AVZ should have published the Dathcom serial number CD/LSH//RCCM/19-B-00935 , and after-all it's partner CATH did in 2021. The Chinese value transparency it seems,

The counter-question is what would you do with that information, "CD/LSH//RCCM/19-B-00935", nothing? At some point some clever dude will plonk that filename, CD/LSH//RCCM/19-B-00935 in a browser, find stuff, probably on the China side.

A bit more clever, they will poke around +.CD websites.

So for the "current situation" , in hindsight, relying on company statements is obviously not enough, or alleged emails @Mining8 from Nigel, it seems you have to be very careful in your reliance and do your own checks @investinvest