SGX has been asked about the differences in regulatory actions taken in the case of Sky One Holdings Limited and in the case of Asiasons Capital Limited, Blumont Group Ltd and LionGold Corp Ltd. Our explanation is given below. We would also refer readers to our regulatory announcement of 25 October 2013 on ?SGX corrects misconceptions.?

Suspension

Not all sharp price movements, whether up or down, warrant a suspension of the stock. Why and when would SGX suspend a stock? Each occurrence has to be evaluated on its own merit in the context of circumstances of the case.

In the case of Sky One, SGX?s review of the circumstances revealed no threat to fair, orderly and transparent trading. Hence, no suspension occurred.

In the case of Blumont, Asiasons and LionGold, SGX?s review showed disorderliness in the market, and lack of transparency which could also threaten the fairness of trading.

Designation

The same principle applies for designation of stocks. Each case is evaluated in the context of its own circumstances. In the case of Sky One, designation was not necessary. In the case of Blumont, Asiasons and LionGold, designation was instituted in order to remove the froth of excessive speculation in the market and permit the fundamentals to assert themselves in determining market prices.

Both suspension and designation are measures which help to return the market to finding its own equilibrium. For Blumont, Asiasons and LionGold, after the end of designation, the forces of supply and demand have reasserted themselves to determine the prices of the stocks. Normal trading conditions have resumed.

Investigation

Investigation of market misconduct is separate and distinct from regulatory tools SGX deploys to bring about fair, orderly and transparent trading in the market. It can be initiated by market activities observed during surveillance.

We understand the public wanting to know more about such investigations but releasing information prematurely could jeopardise the integrity of the investigation.

Furthermore, investigation into the trading of a particular security does not equate to the presence of wrongdoing. Nor does every investigation lead to conviction. It would be unfair if public announcement of an investigation tarnishes the reputation of the stock or of any individual investor.

Where market misconduct reflects possible breaches of the Securities and Futures Act, findings are referred to relevant authorities who can exercise their statutory powers.