C
ChrisU
Guest
The validity of claims is part of it. But it’s not the sole criteria.You raise some valid points but again I think the focus should be on the validity of the claims made by other entities when assessing whether AVZ needed to disclose them and that shouldn't be swayed by the financial outcomes of shareholders in my opinion.
Generally speaking just because a share price goes up doesn't mean management have acted legally and just because a share price goes down doesn't mean management have acted illegally. Share prices can be manipulated in both directions.
Keep your sights on the jungle and not just the trees.
Share price is another aspect to decide quantitatively on any detriment realised, between not knowing because a company didn’t disclose X and knowing (to some decisive degree) when a company discloses something about X.
It’s in continuous disclosure rules for ASX. Read it, it tells you how hard the test is to evade. I was surprised how the objectivity is preserved. Smart lawyers put it together