Traditionally capital consolidations tend to be viewed as window...

Traditionally capital consolidations tend to be viewed as window dressing exercises designed to hide past underperformance and/or atrack institutional investors and in rare cases as exercises in facilitating the change from one regulatory scheme to another, objectives that in the case of Nido do not seem plausible. For instance, as to the objective of reducing number of shareholders, the consolidation was neutral since even if there were shareholders having parcels of less than 50 pre consolidation shares, they would have ended with one post consolidation share. Besides lets not forget that Nido did also announce its intension to offer to purchase unmarketable parcels of shares, an exercise realy designed to reduce the number of shareholders in its share registry.

And, if as suggested by some , the objective was to reduce the price for the shares being traded by making the market iliquid then how to explain the share price rally a few days ago that took NDO's shares from 0.021 to 0.030?

Yesterday I noticed that close to the end of the day somebody sold what it appeared to be a single NDO share causing a substancial fall in the share price and in so doing opening the door for today's carnificine. Was it a blatant market manipulation? Or was it just somebody liquidating a leftover from a trade? I don't know, 'but would like to know as iliquid markets can be easely manipulated by all sorts of manipulators, something that only ASIC has the capacity to investigate.

There is a well known falacy which is called Post hoc erg propter hoc "Since event Y followed event X, event Y must have been caused by event X.", which one should avoid.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_hoc_ergo_propter_hoc