Key takeaways from Geoff Morgan’s Financial Post piece:
- Badger took 1.5 months to call a reporter back and then lied to him.
- BAD still has not answered the questions—even very simply, why are there 2 different sets of 2015 numbers? Which should we believe?
- BAD had “private meetings with shareholders,” the very definition of intentional selective disclosure, yet claims publically answering questions would “inadvertently have selective disclosure.”
- Disclosure has gotten worse, not better.
- The AUDITED NUMBERS cannot be relied upon.
Which is it? It can’t be both.Top 15 Books On Every Investment Professionals Reading List
[timeless]
Why is Badger claiming they are unaware of their own financial statements?
“Badger said they weren’t aware...


