Hey All,
There's been a
**lot** of articles by the Fairfax media - an incredible amount actually, spanning back to events in 2013 that have no relevance today (if they did happen), to embarrassing articles about shareholders and breastfeeding, as well as some pretty darn good twisting of facts and statements to create some juicy headlines.
Now, someone has done a lot of research and fed it Fairfax, as there is no way it all just 'came out' via research one or two days part.
So, from @
@greenhornet , we have theory # 1
1. Volt Bank. Do Volt think they are competing for capital with ISX? or do Volt think that they are competing with ISX, and that ISX will do retail loans? The co-founder of Volt, Luke Bunbury, really has an interesting profile. Compare his to JK's, and Im surprised the media didnt say more about Volt.... Anyway. Has anyone heard of Volt bagging ISX at any meetings?
2. Paypal. A few days after an article was written by the AFR comparing ISX to Paypal, all hell breaks loose. Contender?
3. Edmonds and Larkspur/Tetro. The two exposed 'angels' in court with JK (not ISX) re performance right allocations. JK's position is they werent entitled beyond the paid for shares, as they didnt 'help', their position is that...dunno, didnt need to help? Anyway, this one is slim, as presumably these guys are getting hurt by this as well
4.Walmsley - the other exposed "angel". Has he sold out, and turned 'devil'? A lot of the historic stuff is, well, exactly that. Walmsley would have that stuff at his fingertips. If he's sold out, then, is he capable of playing the Fairfax to this extent? Can we find out if hes a holder? Did he sell out near the peak?
5.Shortsellers. Possible, but the research leading to the Fairfax articles seems a bit too deep, and personal at times. Plus, the shorts werent really there on Shortman. There was a LOT of HFT, but, can HFT's coordinate this? doubtful.
6. OM - doubt they did this off of their own bat. A few blokes scratching to make ends meet by writing reports that have a track record of selling their souls for a subscription fee. These guys will write anything to stay afloat. So, who paid them a fee to write the report on ISX? Was it anyone of 1-5, or someone else?
7. ASIC - interesting that ISX received the ASIC notice 6 days
*after* they were suspended. If ASIC investigation into continuous disclosure was the cause of suspension, surely that would have been issued on the same day. At least the ASX issued its notice same day, and requested reponse a week or so later. So, what happened in those six days? Was ISX in communication with ASIC? Did they request an investigation into volatlity? Into the OM report?
8. Is Fairfax being played for profit, an unwilling or unsuspecting participant, or just a bunch of ar#45holes writing for clickbait? Not sure which one is worse. Never thought Id see theday when the Murdoch press is acting dignified and not sinking into the gutter on innuendo, and Fairfax meanwhile is wallowing in it.
Appreciate thoughts people. Whats clear is that **someone** is out to get ISX or JK or both.
From what I can see, JK and the board have some poor judgment in terms of what they have released, but, there isnt anything illegal or immoral in what they have done.
I also dont see the issue if they have or have not been engage in say Binary options - they are legal in Australia with an AFSL! Crypto can be registered with AUSTRAC, many Aussies gamble and place a punt, and CFD/FX is very mainstream. Noting that these were less than 30% of their transactions, who cares anyway?
Now who, why and whats the profit motive?
May the force be with us holders, including Red 5.
