So what exactly did WP say, not say, and imply in the AGM meeting., page-81

Firstly I'm not "belittling" anyone.

There is absolutely no need to take any of the insights I have given, personally. If anyone has been criticised on a personal level it's me.

Indeed there are one or two who take it on themselves to follow me around into threads they don't usually go to, just to berate me personally, and make false accusations.

But I take it all with an element of resignation, since people will misread you and bite when they're hurting OR if you're getting in the way of a trade.

So. If anything, I've been urging caution and rational thinking. There is absolutely no need to rush to litigation.

It's needlessly destabilising, and there is plenty of time to get clear on what happened and why. Surely the rush to this extreme is damaging to the SP and the company.

Why do it? Well some have been stopped out and have lost a huge amount. In reliance on outlooks. That's not my situation, and I do feel for them. They may argue that they were induced by assurances about how numbers have been shaping up, to rely on them. To exceed the scope of the disclaimers.

But! This is a chat room. I should be able to express a point of view. It's not personal if I call for calm. If I don't want WP to be forced out.

Naturally, I'm interested in what WP's been doing to address the situation. And what the outlook for the company is.

On Monday some things should become clearer. WP might have expected a calmer, less volatile reaction. He didn't get that. He expected different numbers. Why they were't communicated, what was known when is another issue. You might only get that under a discovery process. Or you might wait to see what is communicated.

Just to be clear, (and to restate for about the 4th or 5th time), I haven't and don't blame investors for the drop; one was obviously inevitable given the missed outlook. But surely it would be wiser to avoid making it worse, and wait for more facts to emerge. This has been my point.