"Am very happy I sold IFL on 27/5/15 for $10.69, so the...

"Am very happy I sold IFL on 27/5/15 for $10.69, so the "Farifax" Press has served me well. And very glad I held off when it was $9.59 and you thought it was great value."

I can't help noticing that the overall market has fallen by commensurate amounts as IFL, both from your exceptionally-timed exist price, as well as my $9.59 "good value" price.

Your ability to time the market so accurately is most impressive and something that very few people can do.

That's a rare gift, that is.
You should nurture it.


"You may not have noticed but it's now under $8.50 so I don't know why you're thinking that things have been going well with IFL..."

Oh, in determining how well or unwell things are going with companies in which I invest, I pay zero attention to share price performance; rather, I focus on business performance.

For it is a long-observed observation of mine that share prices ultimately track business performance, and because I don't have your gift for exiting the market at it's peaks (and, presumably, entering at it's troughs), that is therefore my chosen way to invest.


"Once again the federal government has wimped on important reform. You seem to think because nothing has happened that IFL is somehow vindicated in the behaviour that was uncovered. I think that's naive and illogical."

Forgive me.

The reason I thought nothing had happened is simply because that's what the findings of the Senate Inquiry told me. If that makes me naive and illogical then I don't know how to address that other than commission my own personal Inquiry into matters.

But I don't feel I people will take me seriously enough when I notify them that they are required to present themselves to testify before the Madamswer Commission of Inquiry.

Actually, my excuse for being naive and illogical (if that is what I am) is that I am not privy to the most inner machinations of the company as would have been exposed by the Senate Inquiry.

I wonder what excuse Senator Dastyari, along with numerous officials representing various compliance agencies and regulatory authorities - despite the significant resources at their disposal - have for not uncovering anything whatsoever worthy of any formal sanction.

Are you saying the Inquiry was somehow flawed? Or maybe Dastyari et al have been bribed to look the other way? Or maybe Dastyari et al (having found nothing untoward despite having access to all manner of information that exists out of the public arena) are even more naive and illogical than I am (despite my being a mere casual, outside observer).

Or maybe, given your conviction that there is a criminal case to be answered for by IFL, you yourself should have appeared before the Inquiry armed with the incriminating information that the Inquiry failed to unearth.

It's not too late, though...why don't you take the information you have (which, once again the Inquiry missed) and return the favour to Fairfax, by forwarding said information to them.

I'm sure it will make for more sensational reading and sell a lot of newspapers.