David - You have to come clean, as I understand it there was a...

David - You have to come clean, as I understand it there was a bid that was looking to keep shareholders in some way still in the game , but recognising that new money had to come in and had to be paid for with a high price.

W may well be a competitor but if you look at the company
you realise that names from the past are popping up again. Is W wrong to comment - No I think they have every right to send each of us off into the space to research what and who may well get this company.

So I am happy that various parties tried their best to put together a grouping that would salvage something and keep a back door open for existing shareholders. Yes I was a very small part of that. If I saw an opportunity that is true but as much I saw it as a worthwhile punt. A pure gamble.

The evaluation of what was done to whom and by whom will be seen when you look at the directors of new INT in 12 months or even as long as 36 months from now and who are the shareholders. Then I think the story will be understood.

I dont understand what you are trying to say. Its too vague - I have posted probably the most on this - I really have no issue with you if you think I have ulterior motives but then spell it out. I am happy to cop the criticism and wont cry foul. So no TOU's from me, if you want to post what you feel.