Avz did not provide comment.Huljich is never going to give a balanced view, that's the job of a professional journalist. AFR provides a very poor example of journalistic integrity. When will AVZ get the right to respond?
Avz did not provide comment.Huljich is never going to give a balanced view, that's the job of a professional journalist. AFR provides a very poor example of journalistic integrity. When will AVZ get the right to respond?
Something, something Roberts, can't be bothered looking it up, a fucking stain on that family name.And Huljich doesn’t mention the millions of shares he’s been offered by the Chinese behind him trying to roll the BOD
The lowest of lowlifes scum have really made themselves known with this MMGA strategy and their little turd mate
Not too mention that short seller boatman
…. What’s his name again, I’ll look it up and edit it in
By the way, that’s not me who gave @geo_au the ‘like’ for his comment…. I might get frustrated and tell people what I think of them from time to time, but I’ll generally name who I’m referring to and don’t feel the need to back up someone else calling people stupid
Just so you know @geo_au don’t include me when you are calling people names
Once we get favourable ruling from ICC, i'll print custom triple-ply with the verdict embossed on every sheet,Once we get favourable ruling from ICC, i'll print custom triple-ply with the verdict embossed on every sheet, and maybe a tommy the twat meme face on every second sheet.
pre-orders are open now for those also looking to upgrade their toilet paper.
I'm truely shocked at this vile piece of garbage Tommy, using his position as a journalist, he's now literally advertising for MMGA.
Using their marketing lingo and angle.
What the actual fuck!?!
Lets vote to change the Constitution then....Don't "need" 9 but I think the constitution states there can be a "maximum" of 9
The board has certainly operated with less than 9 to this point and may still operate with less than 9 after the AGM depending on whether additional nominees actually get the required votes or not
No need I don't thinkLets vote to change the Constitution then....
A big smile spread across my face.
So shorters have been bailing out?A big smile spread across my face.
Was kidding, thought with the recent vote people would shout me down for proposing a vote lolNo need I don't think
I presume when a company is smaller it may only require a very small number of directors
As a company grows it will most likely look to add additional exertise to the board as a reflection of it's business needs
The AVZ constitution simply stipulates 9 as the maximum number of directors allowed
It can and has operated with less to this point and can still into the future
The shareholders get to vote on whether directors get appointed or not
No need to state it, your ugly avatar says it all....A big smile spread across my face.
Ha ha!Was kidding, thought with the recent vote people would shout me down for proposing a vote lol
I'm more pleased with the huge number still in suffering. No doubt linked to the Chinese $$ behind MMGASo shorters have been bailing out?
Bit of a peak in April at 4.2% or approx 148m shares
Now sitting at around 3.34% or approx 118m shares
Anyone remember how many shares were bought in when we got ASX 200? Because they also shorted just as many.So shorters have been bailing out?
Bit of a peak in April at 4.2% or approx 148m shares
Now sitting at around 3.34% or approx 118m shares
There was around 230m shares bought in the post trade auction on rebalance day. Not all of them were ASX200/300 buys but most would have been. Some would have been added later too. That big spike in the shorts was at the same time so would have been mostly instos hedging. I reckon a good chunk of the 30m closed short positions have just been firms returning shares they lent themselves for the hedge.Anyone remember how many shares were bought in when we got ASX 200? Because they also shorted just as many.