Quote from KungPowBeef"You have to ask yourself, if there was...

Quote from KungPowBeef

"You have to ask yourself, if there was really a case, WHY didn't Carson, Levy, and the other one I've forgotten his name already, find it fit to pursue it already? They have accepted the outcome and have moved on, and so should Thaler. This writ seems to be a vexacious and self-centred act led by one individual, and not supported by Carson, Levy, or the other one, from what I can see. If Thaler doesn't like it perhaps he should take out his money and invest somewhere else like Lithex for example "

Quote from KungPowBeef 28/3/2011

"Carson et. al deserve their fate for NOT putting ANY skin in the company"

RESPONSE : Well well well, how mistaken your comments are
particularly today.

Yesterday I became aware that the day before yesterday, that none other than Mr Malcolm Carson had caused a case to be filed with Malcolm Carson as plaintiff against DMA arguing that the proxies that amounted to millions of shares, and which removed 3 of the previous Directors were invalid.

I later became aware that a hearing in Sydney, open to the public, would be held in the Federal Court in Sydney late yesterday afternoon

At that hearing evidence seemed to be mentioned that a Directors meeting was called for late last Friday (seemed to be a few minutes before 5pm ) to be held on the following Monday morning at 9:30am.

Evidence seemed to have been mentioned by Mr Carson's barrister, that the above mentioned Directors meeting, was to resolve to place to a Shanghai company, 15% of the present shares of Dynasty ( I assume 15% of 90.8m )

It seemed that Professor Gygar the alternate Director for the largest shareholder Xingua, had submitted an affidavit stating that he had been blindsided about this placement, and that SunXiang the Director had sent him an email ( over the weekend I assume) stating that she had not been advised of the impending placement.

It seems that apart from filing a case to challenge the use of irregular proxies, Carson was concerned that the proposed placement 15% would make irrelevant the court's future decision about the narrow removal by ~33m shares to ~30m shares, of the 3 Directors 21st March 2011 EGM

It seem that a Judge will be allocated soon to the case

Carson presented a lengthy affidavit to assist Thaler in his case against DMA, challenging many proxies, a case that was supported by shareholders amounting to most of the 30.3m shares ( that voted against the removal of the 3 Directors )

I would advise everyone to check the accuracy of the above details by calling Mr Carson or Professor Gygar, as it was very fast moving in court.

I think it should be explained why if true, that 2 of the Directors agreed to terms of a 15% placement with a Chinese company, without discussing the placement with the 3rd Director, who also represents the largest Shareholder.

I cannot take any responsibility to the accuracy of the above details, but am simply trying to alert shareholders who may, if the above is found to be accurate, be affected and want to see the emails between Directors about the placement.

I believe that anyone can attend the Federal Court hearings in Macquarie St