re: Ann: Second Quarter Activities and Cashfl...
Tooli and Spiderman
You are both non - holders of CHM and rate it as a sell and from your last posts you appear to be holders of MMX.
So the disclosure you want I doubt is part of any research in consideration of buying CHM. It is just MMX holders wanting this to go away. Despite many predictions that it would be laughed out of court by MMX supporters it seems that both cases will go to trial this year.
If we want to rant about disclosure then ASIC should be hounding MMX for not diclosing any information re the Koh/Evans case which if MMX lose will see them lose 10% of their interest in Crossland. They may be confident that they will not lose by still have to make some form of disclosure as this would have a material impact on the company.
ASIC have just watched billions of value destroyed by financial engineers, the mortgage fund industry collapse and you think that they are going to come running in here worrying about a small cap spec stock. It will be interesting to see if they apply any of their stretched resouces here on the complaints of non-shareholders.
As a shareholder I take from the latest report that the cases are externally funded. So it is the directors job to ensure that CHM can meet its very limited expenses over the next 12 months. This may be through further borrowings which I expect would be private borrowings in this market and I speculate it would come from the larger shareholders who stand to win the most.
Having fought so hard in a very tough market to stay alive to this point I am confident that they will find the required resources to stay alive for a further 12 months by which time in what is an all or nothing bet we will have an answer.
Just to clarify the original cap raising to re-list was 1 cent so for these people they are not far out of the money. Again compare this to the istitution investors who took MMX at $5.00 and now looking at 50 cents.
MMX holders have got to stop worrying about CHM shareholders and our investment. Its touching but not warranted Just concentrate on MMX and maybe ask why there has been such a materiual change in the wording from the start to now by the board in relation to the CHM case and silence on the Koh/Evans case.
On the CHM case its gone from there is no case to no grounds for a claim against the assets. This to me is a material change and an admission that something went on pre the current board's days but they will try and keep them out of the asset.
CHM Price at posting:
0.8¢ Sentiment: Hold Disclosure: Held
