Ann: Winmar to seek Dual Listing on London Stock Exchange, page-99

Time to call a spade a spade. It is wholly disingenuous to pretend any of your commentary is an objective assessment of the company. Not once, from any recollection, have you taken a balanced approach on your commentary i.e. "while X is a positive event and really delivers exciting potential, Y bothers me because ….". Every single company announcement, or any positive commentary is met with wholly negative commentary only. I don't care that you are not invested, and I don't care that you make positive or negative commentary. What I care most about is assessing the motive of the individual making the commentary. Why such continuous negative commentary on the company? Yes there is risk, and it was there prior to investing in the company. So let's get to the pointy end of the discussion. Occam's Razor, a simple explanation is more likely to be correct than a complex one. Why would someone spend so much time continuously being negative on a company. My Dr Phil moment "people don't continuously waste resources, either time or energy, undertaking an activity that doesn't fulfil some need on a physical, mental or financial level". Simply put, there has to be a pay off for that exertion. A simple explanation might be that they are concerned the success of said company may affect the performance of another personal investment. A simple explanation might be they have an axe to grind with certain people and don't want them to be successful. A complex explanation might be one that steers itself away from the simple and obvious ones. I just think it's disingenuous to pretend your motive is pure in any of the "unbiased" analysis you put forward to consideration.