why?

When the announcement of Dunkerley's resignation was made on 28/9/05, QTK made it clear that "he has confirmed that he will continue to voluntarily escrow 12m of the shares he holds in the company"

Now, why did the company not mention what Pallister intends to do with his holding in the 15/11/05 announcement?

I'm not trying to suggest anything here, but I do think it would be in the best interests of the shareholders' to disclose Pallister's intentions, evpecially in view of the fact that he has a 45% holding.

Perhaps the logical reason for this may be that the board is saying look everyone he is no longer md etc. but we don't wish to spell out that he still has a 45% control.

Any comments?