mjmj, I suspect the reasons for not dual listing is more than just the costs. Continue listing on the ASX would require Biota Management to comply with ASX rules - shareholders have not been particularly impressed by Peter Crook's compliance with ASX rules during the long painful years.
I suspect the useless management have no liking to comply with 2 sets of listing rules thus they were happy to delist from the ASX at the expense of shareholders.
Peter Crook feared the NSADAQ listing could not get through NABI shareholders - he had so much benefits riding on the reversed take-over. His millions and millions of free options turning into free shares (making him the 4th largest single BTA shareholder at the time of merger), an extra year of remunerations, continuing directorship of the new board, many many free first class air travels, luxurious accomodations, champanges and topclass dinning all at shareholders expense.
The pain and suffering to longterm faithful BTA shareholders caused by Peter Cook and the BTA board could not be too disimilar to the pain caused by paedophiles in the playground. Biota has top class science with the useless management under Peter Crook and board members being richly rewarded while destroying shareholders value. Peter Cook blamed BTA shareholders for the poor share price for years (remember him berating shareholders for speculating on Relenza during the bird flu outbreak and then again during the swineflu outbreak?)and Fox berating shareholders dissenting on the NASDAQ listing - is it as bad as paedophiles blaming their victims?
Happy New Year to all BOTA shareholders and hope for luck to recover your losses.
BTA Price at posting:
0.0¢ Sentiment: None Disclosure: Held
