As my name has been raised again by a poster. I am happy to post the definition of Insider Trading regarding the legalities aspect. The poster pointed out a time reference but what he didn't mention was the full definition of Insider trading with the movement of shares.
There are two definitions for Insider Trading. 1. In the illegal kind, one breaches the company's trust by trading based on the inside information while others remain ignorant. 2. In legal cases, an insider buys or sells securities of their corporation based on the inside information.
Let me make it crystal clear. None of the two above reference of definition applies to me.
I am happy to put this on public record again so I have a couple of posts for when I need them regarding my share holding with CGB. 1. At the time, before disposal of shares, I held 1.29% of the company holdings and was under the 5% required holdings to do an official ASX notification 2. I contacted the company to inform them that I needed to dispose of my shares as a point of courtesy. 3. I disposed of the shares legally not gaining a financial advantage but carried a large loss on the sale of the shares. 4a. At the time of the disposal of shares I was not given any information or clue to a future halt in trading by any "Insider" in management or holding a Directorship with CGB. 4b. At the time of the disposal of shares I was not given any information or clue to a future halt in trading by any Third party Investor or company employee related to CGB. 5. After being questioned about a possible breach or advantage of selling on this CGB HC forum, I sought advice "again" regarding the disposal of shares and was informed that my actions were completely legal and legitimate. 6. I paid the forum a courtesy and updated members of my sale. That also was not required. Insider Traders, don't make a rule of telling the General Public of their actions. They have a tendency to hide it, from what I have read.
May I say with respect and caution. Posters just need to be careful when inferring or trying to imply in the body of their texts/posts (plural) comments that potentially, slander or impute harm towards a member, on a public forum with content that may be false, misleading or incomplete. Even one of our legal eagle posters perhaps might caution the use of certain "wording of posts" within reason.
Posters definitely have the right to say what they like here, and I am not reporting them to HC. I can only mention potential consequences for those who slander against anyone for that matter. I know one poster who has already potentially followed up on one of my references for actions taken and I appreciate their backing off. I have made contact with the eSafety Commissioner on a couple of occasions who has given me advice based on what has been occurring. That is all anyone can do.
