If you are serious about doing some digging, you need to go right back to the IPO and floatation, then work your way through what went on around Solstra, the home Computing Initiative, then look at the purchase of Button and more recent events.

The various managements all played a greater or lesser part here - IMHO, they all need careful scrutiny.

The problem in all these situations is telling incompetence, bad judgement and arrogance from culpable negligence and detecting potentially criminal activity by company directors.

It is the case that directors' l,iability insurance and/or civil proceedings have got money back for shareholders and creditors of mis-managed companies in the past, so it is always looking into what led any company to the situation this one is said to be in.

I have no evidence of any criminal activity and am not making any specific allegations, but given the nature of the FMDAY story, as the company's longest standing sceptic and critic going back over 15 years, I personally cannot square the endless claims of positive EDBITA, PRs about hook ups with major players and the flannel in CCs etc with the audited accounts - can you?

I continued to question the business model for over a decade - now we know that for the entire time IMHO this company was losing money hand over fist, whilst senior management paid itself hansomly for their "contribution" - but see the account filings for yourself.

I question whether "safe harbor" statements are intended to allow managements of companies to consistently mislead shareholders - I also wonder whether the timings of PRs with "pump 'n dump" activty was all purely a coincidence....