MM,What you say is logical.However, you have to remember that...

MM,

What you say is logical.

However, you have to remember that the original, way back when, company was funded by Perry Manusu, the father of the chairman.

My point is, Perry has lost 99.9% of his investment in the company. His investment has been, as I can see, largely managed by the same people, some of whom are family. Now if that's how they treat their own family, what chance do we have?

Now, I have children, as does Perry. And nothing my children do is ever too bad, especially if they can justify it. I would understand how other parents could see their children in the same light, even if they are murderers, rapists, con-men or corporate criminals.

BUT, if my child took 99.9% of the company I had built AND my superannuation from me, well I'd probably start to smell the coffee. Perry is probably old by now and probably isn't as sharp as he must have once been, but I am just guessing. He may be part of the whole thing, but I doubt that as we haven't seen his name on anything other than top 20 for a long time. He's probably a decent genuine guy living in his retirement years, hoping his investment in great IP will come to him before his passing. If not, it'll pass to his kids, what's left of it.

One reasonable observation you have made is that the company is now close to 100% owned by the directors and their family. So was this the goal all along, to take it all before it becomes worth gazillions? Or is this just an elaborate Ponzi scheme to fleece shareholders of which family are easy pickings? We've all had a relo who has taken money from us of a close family member.

RB thinks gazillions.

I am not sure. I think there have been times already to make the gazillions and no one has been capable enough to get it done. We had 2 big and serious shareholders, who were not related, both decide to exit a sizeable investment. These shareholders tried to effect positive change when the share price was in double digits, although not at the 15c option price still not received from what could appear to be "creating a false market".

I have not seen a single board member buy a single share on market (i.e. support the price) for over 18 months. The last time they bought on market was to "support" the market as we shareholders were being asked to participate in an SPO, which, regrettably, I did. That was at 10c. Was that the "creating a false market" that the auditors have documented? We just don't know. And those HC posters who do seem to have access, have not told us either. There's certainly smoke on that one and just about everything else done here.