Is my theory (cryptically presented) that Gillard wanted the...

Is my theory (cryptically presented) that Gillard wanted the $500million spotlight accurate.

This morning should tell.

Commercial realities are the more likely reason for the delay - but I wouldn't rule out today.


As for MHM being responsible for the 17th - they weren't until they chose to release an announcement backing it up.
They offered no clause to the 17th.
If they had no direct knowledge of this date - they should of stipulated such.
The ASX is the wild west compared to reporting standards in the US and UK. Investors accepting bs standards is a big part of the problem.
I didn't day trade the announcement - but I did shift positions quicker than I otherwise would of.
As it happens - that shift has been positive.

But it still amazes me how energetically investors defend bs timelines that I wouldn't accept from a year 5 student.

What is so wrong with expecting something delivered on time OR getting updated before the time has lapsed.

Honestly - who of you defending this would accept this from a contractor doing a $1,000 on your house.
Just in case you are not familiar with contractors - their market cap is rarely over $5million - they have no secretary dedicated to keeping their stakeholders informed.
Frequently people argue that only the day-traders get burned. That is gamblers.
Rubbish - investing without accurate information and a company committed to keeping us informed is gambling.

Lastly - I acknowledge that MHM management is better than most. But everything above applies.