Full Disclosure and the new investors.

In the last few weeks the directors have raised circa $1.0m via two tranches of share placements. Over 660 million new shares. You have to wonder just what these new investors are being told about the company's investments and prospects. Certainly there has been no disclosure to the market as to the current position of the Chapmans high conviction investments. If you take the position that new investors are not stupid and don't easily part with their money, then it leaves the option that they have enjoyed disclosure far in excess of market disclosure. On a valuation level they have acquired over 25% interest (660 million shares) for circa $1.0 million. Not bad IF one or more of the high conviction investments is actually valuable. Say one of the investment is actually worth $20 million, the new investors have a new value on just this asset of $5.0 million. Not bad, invest a million and turn it into five million. What will be interesting is to see the shareholders register and understand who these new investors are. Not only have they bought in at pennies in the dollar compared to the prices paid by the older investors, they enjoy what must be full disclosure, something the existing shareholders and presumably the market in general has not enjoyed. So who are the new investors? Be they sophisticated investors? Only if the theory above is correct. Friends, family & fools? Forget family and fools. Hard to imagine these directors have that many friends. If it's just a few insiders then we would expect notices of substation holdings to be lodged. Nothing. Time will tell on who this privileged group are and the nature of full disclosure given by the directors to facilitate the placement. Especially given the share placements were made in the same period of weeks that the directors June quarterly update was issued and it contained zero information to the market about the nature of their investments and prospects. It seems to make a bit of a mockery of the ASX rules to keep the market fully informed, or perhaps there are two sets of rules?