I can see where you are coming from when you say 'trust, investigate and then make a decision'. While in real life we might not follow through the exact system, however, there are merits in your view especially when we relate to our situation as holders invested in ISX. Our decision to invest was based on several factors, the significant ones to most might have been the 'quality of management' and 'business idea'. Being a start-up, there was not much financial history to wade through.
So given that I'm invested in ISX, I will trust that the Directors (management)
1 Will do what is necessary to grow shareholder wealth.
# Invest wisely, scope out newer opportunities, and build a business that is viable and scalable.
2 Respect (apply) the laws of the land, whatever that may be, e.g. Safety, HR, Tax, etc.
When OM's released first surfaced, as a holder I need to first investigate before making a decision. One of the definitions of investigation (copied below) starts with 'evidence gathering'. Even after 9 months of bullsh@tting, what's the evidence in front of us that claims ISX has done something that breaks rule 2 (above). They might have made some minor mistakes, which is quite normal in their space. However, did this warrant a suspension?
I also think we need to be mindful of traders vs holders, as such, there are several traders on this thread with a narrative that is different ours.
"The investigative process is a progression of activities or steps moving from evidence-gathering tasks, to information analysis, to theory development and validation, to forming reasonable ground to believe, and finally to the arrest and charge of a suspect."
- Forums
- ASX - By Stock
- Why is it easier to mistrust ISX in the absence of proof then it is to trust?
I can see where you are coming from when you say 'trust,...
-
-
- There are more pages in this discussion • 89 more messages in this thread...
You’re viewing a single post only. To view the entire thread just sign in or Join Now (FREE)