2NDLY... there is some waffle about developers that are our...

2NDLY... there is some waffle about developers that are our customers,arent willing to invest at low prices.. well thats the truth right there??

there is strong arming somewhere..someone pressuring someone? cos our customers are our customers right? why should we care if our customer buys into our stock or not?

some mite say 'exposure' i would say rubbish! we are already exposed.. they are our customer already..

its rubbish all those comments about long term holding security etc.. id say short term threats of takeover/dilution is the correct translation?

the stock only trades on low volume anyhows.. and has done so for at least 5years like that.. 60% or more of INT stock has been already held by long term viewed shareholders for close to 8 years! id say that ratio would be higher then BHP or RIO?

if i was a major shareholder.. i would most definately take todays ann as an attempt to insult all my years of support and my own 'strategic' offerings.

customers..they are doing business with us right? they are still our customer? someone has had a whinge and tried to storng arm someone behind the scenes to cut our grass.

reading between the lines.. it reads to me that 'we' intend to dilute ur holdings further.. very soon.. by issuing a lot of stock to someone else, perhaps a developer?.. under the false presentation that it will grossly improve our sales 'pipeline' thru 'exposure'... whereas id say : grossly improve a developers ability to further strong arm this entity at the expense of the current long termers ,that INT already has today..obviously mgmt has much work yet to do to respect their current backers, what they already have onboard!

if a customer of ours wants to buy a piece of our pie on market at some point, well whos business is that? theirs right? our directors imo should not even be entertaining it..or making any business decisions in order to attempt to cater for it.. its a sign of being a sheep and not a leader?