Blimey! You really are a lightweight if this is your...

Blimey! You really are a lightweight if this is your response...and it lacks context of whatever point you are trying to make. Context and comprehension doesn't come easy for some it seems and it isn't a feature of cut-n-paste either.

Whatever a group of minority shareholders are doing to preserve or recover their capital is their right and if they decide to meet that is also their right. What they do or intend doing is something that rests amongst themselves and they need to work through their options and subsequent actions. There are a number of ways they can approach it but a takeover of a market regulator suspended entity isn't one of them so your argument is neither plausible nor relevant.

I will offer this - "association" can also be referred to in the ACL Schedule 2 (i.e. the old Trade Practices Act) for collusive market conduct but that also bears no relevance here. Where it might apply however is in regards to related parties acting in concert with other parties or in the shadow of, or under instruction from, others parties to restrict or inhibit the lawful or natural purpose of market activity relating to a publicly listed company including related parties, family members and associated entities. See Company Directors obligation for more details.

IF by any chance they pursue and lodge a takeover offer (as defined under the Corporations Act) of PDF at some point in the future and act upon that intent then a new set of criteria and conditions come in to play.