This is a larger case, as the 'Case Investment' have after Dec...

This is a larger case, as the 'Case Investment' have after Dec 2016 averaged below $60m, with the IMF  board's express wish NOT to take on bigger case investments.

This case is interesting in that although WOW tumbled by about 13.9% on the day they published their accounts, which would have been roughly a $4 bn loss to market capitalisation on that day, the segment that bought between the November announcement to that February date would only be at least 100m/0.139 = $719m bought during the interval.

I am surprised that WOW.AX trades that much.

BUT

That would only apply if the price had dropped off a plateau, say as when Volkswagen's diesel emission suppression was announced.

However the price did not drop off a plateau at WOW.AX.

After the announcement there was only a somewhat delayed,  increase in price. An increase that does not directly accord with the premise that buyers bought, in the knowledge of the announcement. In fact most of the buy impetus arose (to give a price effect) only arose in later part of Feb, 2015, which by then the November disclosure was quite stale!

Assuming the Efficient Market Hypothesis is at all relevant. Not a hypothesis I'd want to argue before a court of law! I hope IMF knows their case is strong.

This was not vetted by the ACCC who had other issues to address, but in that inquiry, it became clear (Aug 2014) that what WOW.AX said to the ACCC denied what was announced in 27 Nov 2014

But my point is that few of the investors in that period incurred the 13,9% loss. In fact, very few of the investors who bought after Nov, 2014 to mid Feb 2015 incurred any loss at all, and some may have (still) incurred a small profit.   If so my $719m is small, and IMF must be relying on an even larger number of investors/buyers in the interval.

Interesting...

I hope IMF-Bentham can argue this!