No issue with non-holders posting - it's useful to have a range...

No issue with non-holders posting - it's useful to have a range of perspectives from both current and former shareholders, or just interested observers - when evaluating a business/stock. However, when posters switch between held and non-held it raises questions about their motivations/agendas. Some of your comments are fair - we should be sceptical of Bolton/Keybridge's motivations and potential for related party transactions.

The ASX has rules to protect minority shareholders from the scenarios you are speculating about. See ASX GN 24 for example: https://www.asx.com.au/documents/rules/gn24_acquisition_and_disposal_of_assets.pdf Sure there's potential for these to be circumvented. However, Bolton already has a target on his back (eg his previous ban by ASIC from managing companies) and ASIC could use some good news ATM so he should be incentivised to swim between the flags. I'm not saying he will, but he has reason to and I believe there are easier ways for him to extract YOW's cash which aligns with minority shareholders' interests.

YOW is <1% of my domestic equities portfolio but if I can get more at a discount to cash backing I will. I've done well out of CLB and learnt a lot about the industry as a result of that investment. The dynamics are different here but the risk/return is attractive IMO. Thats why I'm here.

I appreciate some of your commentary @Teddyward, it just lacks objectivity at times.