Smashed at close, page-125

Well, it is nearly really as risky as aviation or flying a plane or defense? I am sure others will assess the danger levels, risk levels and ride entry procedures quite considerably and charge quite a lot of money by the hour doing so.

Quietness, serenity and tranquil thoughts depend on your point of view. 3 from Canberra, 1 from Sydney (originally from NZ) in the Gold Coast at an amusement park: Canberra was pretty quiet, serene and tranquil from my recollection. Sydney far less so and the Gold Coast was hot, somewhat quiet, serene during the day, tranquil in daylight not at night from my memory.

Would a reasonable person expect an elevated level of danger at an amusement park? And if so or not as the case might be, does AAD have sufficient maintenance, risk assessments, risk profiling of customers, risk profiling of rides, risk profiling of marketing materials and risk notifications to customers on tickets, billboards, rides and pamphlets etc? Does AAD completely adhere to its Corporate Governance Statement? How seriously is maintenance, governance and risk profiling taken? At what level? Board, executives, senior management, Park management, employees, training courses for prospective, new staff, refreshers for staff?

The Attorneys will consider this, and insurance companies on renewals, regulators and creditors will also consider these things in the coming days, months, years and corporate culture may be changed forever as a result.

I think the events of this week will have made AAD, VRL and a lot of other companies think a lot more seriously about these things. The Corporate Governance Statement took on a lot more focus within the company results pack.