Soundness of analysis need not be sacrificed for accuracy - they...

Soundness of analysis need not be sacrificed for accuracy - they are not mutually exclusive or in any way inversely related.

In this case I'm not concerned about not knowing the exact amounts - you're right - "near enough is good enough" within reason. I'm concerned that I don't know where the amounts are - i.e. which entity owns which proportion of the assets, and that it won't be near enough if the assets are not where I expect them to be.

Also - I'd be a bit careful about getting attached to a margin of safety concept as it applies to disclosure by the company. I think it's appropriate as a post valuation risk management technique to take into account in your risk coverage requirement with respect to future asset revaluations, fx rates, etc., but it's not appropriate in regards to financial disclosure. If I have a share trading at 50c and I'm pretty sure it's worth somewhere between 65c and $1.20, I don't accept that as good enough reason not to require the company to clarify their financials so I can work out what I think it's actually worth. I want to understand their information, work out what it's worth to me based on the actual financials, and THEN apply whatever margins or wiggle factors I think are appropriate.

There's no reason that I can see why a clear breakdown of assets by entity shouldn't be available. Letting it ride on an assumed "margin of safety" rather than seeking clear financial information is counterintuitive to me.

Anyway, I've just downloaded the prospectus documents and will have a look through - would have been helpful for UOS to post them on ASX, but thanks for tip - I found the link to the documents on Bursa Malaysia through a third party website by google search. Hopefully they will clear up which assets are where. I hope so - I've held UOS for more than ten years and until now have been happy with their clear reporting.