'You might still be in front if you backed those companies, but...

'You might still be in front if you backed those companies, but you'd be even further in front if you'd backed a whole raft of companies that he slated'

Hm.. yes, true. But if you could have shorted all the 'bad' ones then I think you would also have come out in front. I think when some comments of a large number of stocks there will always be incorrect calls. No one gets them all right all of the time.

However I take your point that some of the calls have the benefit of hindsight

I don't want to take the thread off topic - The Aussie piece, but I still think he is a worthwhile read as long as people DYOR on all companies.

Getting back to his 'claims' on OSL. He asserted that the NB has raised a number of points and that one is serious regarding the manufacturing process. It would be so easy for OSL to make an ANN and refute this, if they so desired. Not a fluffy, feel good worded piece but a straight honest basis of where the CE mark if, and any issues they are working on.

I think SH deserve to be informed when a commentator that they are clearly concerned about makes an assertion. I suspect that the legals will all be dropped with some words about it's not becoming of OSL to pursue the matter.

Why don't OSL prove him wrong rather than going legal? It would also give the SP a kick, probably, so why not?