mascale
4 hours ago
Among the literate, worldwide: "A holding company primarily focuses on owning and controlling other companies (its subsidiaries), rather than engaging in day-to-day operations or producing goods/services, instead managing investments and providing strategic oversight." Then when the operations review was announced--the focus on acquisition capabilities, (including authroized publicity), possibly had basis in an inaccurate stock transfer--(announced)--and possible previous water company inaccuracies, (announced). The review was to include legal matters. Hiru had expectations regarding Patagonia Lithium, reportedly. Their CEO--disappointed late February announcement--also reported an expectation of likely further Hiru involvement in Patagonia Lithium: In that announcement. That was not a Hiru announcement.
mascale
20 hours ago
Interim Corporate Secretary, Newtina, posted a positive outlook just this month, No timeline was created: Needing approval, something new in messages from HIRU. The asset valuation is under review--not per Summers or ERM--but per Hiru management. There was an audit commence and then an assets review commenced. Tasmanian connections and valuations were at minimum put on hold. Truist was still aware of HIRU posted per late January filing. Disappointed CEO at Patagonia Lithium could offer a positive prognosis of further Hiru contact a month later--public information. Now it is later on in March, liquidity apparent even today. Lots of sellers, then bouncing up from daily lows. Not even NYSE-level stock futures are doing that.
mascale
23 hours ago
Noting posted wronginvestor self-contradicting im-poster. Ignore all previous anouncements, not including about the money they raised from overseas investors(?): And just as likely, all ther others. The company went into data reviewing, partially based on problems with conflicting messages.
The Hiru silence is better noted from the announcement timelines--not in the ignore all previous category(?). The interim Corporate Secretary has described an approval process--not to be ignored. There are legal and other likely sensitive issues being evaluated--following along what the interim Corporate Secretary reported--needing a consistent messge instead of competing interpretations. So an outcome messaging is better said underway, consistent with reports and not about an email independently received. Easily noticed is that is not likely a part of a company-wide approval process, for dissemination.