@retiredyoung i think what you are in essence asking for is...

@retiredyoung

i think what you are in essence asking for is complete both literal and connotational truth in announcements.

ie dont call something contracted sales minimums because some/most readers will assume that means they are guaranteed - call them 'binding minimum and maximum sales targets linked to regional exclusivity rights'

dont say there is a waiting list for full initial 1000 systems unless its end user related - not 3rd party distributor related - given such an eoi from a distributor doesnt represent the same level of certainty of end user demand

i totally get it. feel it myself to some degree.

but - frankly if thats the pass mark - ASX must now start issuing letters to every big cap in the ASX every day. probably every stock. it will never ever happen

there probably isnt a single announcement that goes out without containing contractions of quite complex agreements/situations that have connotations for readers - some of which are incorrect.

investors are often greedy and so are inclined to interpret information over positively.

equally mgt teams have a long long history of preying on such ambiguity. eg after sandfire's degrussa discovery did you notice how frequently small cap mining explorers started talking about volcanic massive sulphides (VMS)?

thats because they wanted investors to bid up stock on incorrect assumption VMS deposits are all de grussas

VMS deposits are in fact often barren or trace deposits incapable of supporting a feasible project

But the geological terminology is incorrectly interpreted by lay people

what in fact BUD appears to have had was profound interest from distributors as well as end users but the distributors were the reason for the volume.

But most of us would say distributor expressions of interest are not real EOIS - the same way a real estate agencies projection of sale price and timing isnt the same as EOIs from actual buyers

I;ve read the BUD announcements fairly thoroughly though some time back and need to refresh occassionally.

I think you'll find theyve been correct in the literal words written. Its the martet takeaways that were overoptimistic.

But if you read for eg the bottom of p1 and top of p 2 on the 29 may 2017 announcement - I think you will find the company was quite transparent that the majority of interest was distributor/resellers and that individual trials had to occur first before suc large volume deals could even be considered

I wont go so far as saying mgt didnt realise market would take the highlights and run with it. everyone knows it was a bull mnarket at the time - market is a goldfish with concepts at those points

But that frankly is on the market - not on the company

But there's nothing Ive read, with the exception of
a) the Carribean rollout being on schedule despite hurricanes (this after the biggest events occured), to a later delay to that - and
b) the inconsistent early use of terms 'units' and 'systems' -
where the company disclosures earlier arent consistent with what they said in 2017

And in fact what the tells you is that - while income is longer to come than those initial overegged hopes initially prices in - the whole excitement of the 10s of thousands of facilities remains intact and ahead for the company - with the caveat that those distributors still have to confirm the demand they forecast is real

like with my real estate agency analogy - those EOIs are not of the same quality as end users EOIs.

But it would be folly to say the agencies dont generally have a fair feel for what sales price and timing will end up being across the full spread of market

frankly - unless the ASX is enquiring down different lines - i think they will end up with egg on their faces.

They are engaging in thought police work - and frankly the company announcements nealry entirely contain mitigations that foresaw and disarmed that risk

More penetratingly - unless they unearth that the min max 3 yr income forecasts are fraudulent which doesnt appear borne out given the conclusion of akll the distribution agreements - i think BUD could legitimately accuse the ASX of a violently inconsistent approach to disclosure standards

Because as I said - there isnt a big cap annnouncement I read each day that doesnt contain some form of minimalisation/ obscurance of the real sausage

just think of all the bs announcements from CBA, NAB, ANZ, and WBC containing calming totally fabricated and misleading statements regarding the cost extent etc of fraud and deceptive/unconscionable activities theyve conducted in recent years that the royal commission has shown were entirely lies - in most cases lies known to senior exec and board