Dott. Please don't misquote me. I said right from the beginning the following:
1. It is irrelevant whether the directors own a lot of shares because they are not the main people responsible for strategy. I never once said management (as in people employed within MLS) had huge parcels of shares - they don't as you can see from the disclosure requirements as required by the ASX. 2. I said MLS is effectively driven strategically by a third party operator who has many mining interests, MLS being one of them. 3. I said that this operator and it's shareholders own a large chunk of MLS and I went on to explain how such holdings could be structured for sound financial reasons in certain ways but yet still remain undisclosed. I also spoke about the issue of options and the use of trusts.
The thrust of my argument was that the concern of directors not owning shares is not valid because the operator responsible for strategy does.
I have not changed my view or my basis thereof once. I don't mind if you think I am wrong but please don't insinuate that I have changed my story. I haven't.
I am thorough Dott. Although I have practiced law at a top SA law firm for 20 years (banking and finance) I have looked at the ASX rules as well as your Corporations Act. I have also spoken to our correspindent attorney in Australia (Allens) to confirm certain issues I had as well as do a due diligence on MLS.
So, feel free to disagree with me but don't misquote me please.
Best regards Obelix
MLS Price at posting:
2.0¢ Sentiment: Buy Disclosure: Held
