Share
5,760 Posts.
lightbulb Created with Sketch. 111
clock Created with Sketch.
06/08/18
17:33
Share
Originally posted by Pioupiou
↑
Adelaide's weather has been miserable since Friday, so I stayed at home and poked around on my PC, which included writing this post, and the previous one.
It is interesting how the buy-side changed from Friday at about 5:00PM and this morning at about 9:30AM.
Friday 5:00PM
<<<<<< BUY >>>>> ...... <<<< SELL >>>>>>
5 ... 441991 ... $0.580 ....... $0.585 ... 94281 ... 3
2 ....... 8940 ... $0.575 ....... $0.590 ... 13000 ... 1
6 ..... 33998 ... $0.570 ....... $0.595 ... 37840 ... 4
3 ..... 86114 ... $0.565 ....... $0.600 ... 37224 ... 9
4 ..... 45392 ... $0.560
Monday 9/30AM
<<<<<< BUY >>>>> ...... <<<< SELL >>>>>>
5 ..... 27391 ... $0.580 ....... $0.550 ... 18096 ... 1
2 ....... 8940 ... $0.575 ....... $0.585 ... 94281 ... 3
6 ..... 30598 ... $0.570 ....... $0.590 ... 13000 ... 1
3 ..... 86114 ... $0.565 ....... $0.595 ... 37840 ... 4
4 ..... 45392 ... $0.560 ....... $0.600 ... 37224 ... 9
On Friday the SP closed at 58c, and the average for the day was $91,653/158853 = 58.062 cents. This suggests to me that the closing SP was realistic for the day. The SP is likely to open at 58c, and it may go up a smidgen today, but this is just a hunch.
The Court Order of 19/07/18 may be an issue for some investors. It stated, “1). The applicant file and serve an application and affidavit in relation to all discovery issues by 27 July 2018. 2). The respondent file and serve any evidence in reply by 6 August 2018.” It is possible that the applicant availed itself of a further provision of the order – namely, “Depending on the outcome of the discovery application, the applicant may seek to revisit the timing of service of the draft amended statement of claim.”
The best short-term outcome, IMO, that could happen within reason is that the parties agree to drop the matter and bear their respective legal costs incurred to date. Otherwise the matter could end up as a drawn out matter that is unlikely to meaningfully benefit the applicant party. The $50M matter touted by Maurice Blackburn was, IMO, a mirage.
Expand
50 million bucks is a huge damages claim!
even if M & B gets only 25 million, it was a worthwhile exercise in trying to put justice before corruption!
you must remember that the advertised company slogan of M&B is self-explanatory -'we fight for fair'!
why do you think i am so interested in the outcome of this case?
it's because it sets a precedent and if the head honcho from FOR had any morals whatsoever, this powderkeg would not be on his shopping list of 'junk' food.
cheers crazypunter