Yep. Just put it all in the US megacap tech firms, and sleep easy :)

Cracking video @Magneto as I reflect on buying back in to WTC on the opening after selling out in 2017 at a 3x then watching with interest/regret since but never feeling it was good value...

Now all the Silly Hr Internal Troubles are out in the open, I find a price that is of interest... or maybe just recognise what type of investor I am as I take a sidewards glance at my MIN holding!!!

None the less thank you all for the great coverage and discussion on WTC recently and over the years, I will now be somewhat more directly engaged.

That video was a cracker. What's the word on how that expansion into the US is going?

Apparently Perplexity reckons it's going ok, and that the US now accounts for 36% of total revenue. I might dip a toe in the water.

News Summary:

DJ Former WiseTech Bears See Risks in Both Directions -- Market Talk

WTC$71.46-$0.06 (-0.1%)$71.44$71.46

29 Oct 2025 12:11:41

0111 GMT - WiseTech Global's latest share-price dive shakes loose its bears at Jarden, where analysts see significant risks in both directions.

Raising their recommendation to neutral from underweight, the Jarden analysts say fiscal 2026 consensus expectations remain conservative and tell clients that the logistics-software provider is still a strong growth, high-returning business. However, they also see an investigation into share trades by its executive chair as having the potential to distract management.

They reckon there is potential for the stock to rerate if WiseTech reiterates guidance at next month's annual general meeting. Jarden cuts its target price by 11% to A$73.00. Shares are up 0.5% at A$71.85. ([email protected])

(END) Dow Jones Newswires

For a company with this moat and seemingly decent valuation currently, it’s a bottom drawer stock for me. I’ll keep an eye out for any disastrous news, but I’m pretty comfortable holding this with a long-term 3-5-10 year lens.

My concern is all this is happening while they are still trying to digest and integrate their largest acquisition to date, and the shares aren’t exactly priced for all the additional risk (though it’s getting there).

I agree @thunderhead

I think there are a couple of issues here:

1. RW has a lifestyle that is clearly not suited to the scrutiny of running a large public company.
2. Whatever his personal life, he clearly is very skilled at integrating the various acquisitions over the years. That seems to be the real secret sauce to WTC.
3. If I am a manager at a large company looking a various software options, at what point does the impropriety of RW start to influence my decision on whether or not to deploy WTC products?
4. Zubin Appoo is, imo, way underqualified to be running a company of the scale of WTC. This is obviously RW's "yes" man. Which again raises all sorts of risks (the independent directors are also gone).

It sort of right now ends up feeling like damned if they do damned if they don't wrt RW. Would you trust Zubin to integrate acquisitions? There's no reason to. And then at what point does WTC's reputation start to suffer?

As you say, this isn't "cheap" and assumes pretty good ongoing execution of the sort that has happened since listing.

Too hard for me right now.

"My investing rule is simple; I look for any single reason NOT to invest." - Mohnish Pabrai aka The Indian Warren Buffett.

Youtube: How to FILTER STOCKS under 1 Minute | Mohnish Pabrai | Investment | Multibagger

Disclaimer: May be more of a paraphrase than a direct quote.

Yeah, well put @UlladullaDave. You have articulated the concerns well.

Thanks for the details @mikebrisy

I'm being punished from 2 fronts. WTC and DVP

And the echo chamber in HC for DVP is real. I'm saying one thing there about a poor ramp update for a 1bn+ company and they say another.

I'm doing nothing for now.

Just further to my post on the $WTC share dealing question, I expect the matter will focus on the share sales by RW that took place when he wasn't on the Board.

Recall, he left the Board on 24 October 2024, taking on the role of Founder and Founder CEO, returning to the Board in late February 2025. During this time he continued to sell shares, and was a substantial holder but not a director, but he was (I'd argue) certainly still an Insider. Here is one of the disclosures of the trades and the prices achieved.

Change in Substantial Holding.

It should be a fairly straightforward process to ascertain whether these sales were properly controlled. When we think about the Board mayhem going on at the time, did the internal controls continue to function correctly? (What might the former Non-Execs have disclosed in their interviews with ASIC to be "helpful"?)

From this notice, the change in RW's substantial holding tipped over the 1% disclosure threshold on 20th December, and the communication to the market occurred as required 2 days later. Because RW wasn't a Director disclosures of each trade were not required, only once the aggregate of sales passed the 1% change threshold.

However, RW remained an "Insider" and so the question that I expect ASIC are focusing on is that, as the year came to an end, did RW have information about the company's performance and did he act in compliance with the the company's own policies for share transactions by Insiders? Clearly, from today's release, the question also applies to other managers.

So let's just remember what happened. On 24th February, the company announced:

The Board has reviewed progress of the Company’s activities having regard to the revenue and EBITDA guidance given to the market at the Company’s AGM. The Company now expects revenue to be at the bottom end of the guidance range, due to further delays to the rollout of the three announced Breakthrough Products. EBITDA margin rate is expected to be towards the top of the previously announced range, driven by stronger results from a company-wide efficiency program. 

It also announced the mass resignation of the Non Execs.

The SP dropped around 20% on the 24 February, with most of the press attention focused on the governance changes.

So ASIC should reasonably investigate whether any Insider sales made in the closing weeks of CY2024 were privvy to the knowledge of the impact of the "further delays to the rollout of the three announced Breakthrough Products" might have on the share price. Clearly, these delays would have been clearly known to all Insiders at that time.

From my simple outsiders perspective, it does not look to me that late 2024 was a wise time for an Insider to attempt to sell any shares. And you might reasonably think that the internal controls on approving Insider sales would have been effective. But were they?

This will be interesting.

@mikebrisy thanks for the rehash, Mike, id forgotten most of that. I'm a buyer today, but I have to admit half heartedly. i have been through personal trading dramas, and I can understand why the admin can get messy. there is a huge difference between insider trading and poor admin, we shall see. what keeps me reticent is the new acquisition and the last result. i would really like a positive update on progress, that could be a turning point for WTC imo. AGM 21/11

 Agree @mikebrisy that this is a great business, and hopefully it plays out as you've suggested. However, I now mostly take the cautious path on these sorts of things after being bitten a few times back in the day.

My view now is that I'll make a quick decision to either hold or sell. Then if imho the thesis isn't broken and if sentiment turns positive I can always buy back in all with the view of capital preservation whereas previously (not all but some cases) I've held on and pondered a situation and by the time I've decided to exit lost a substantial amount of capital as I can never predict with any accuracy what/how the market will react to such things.

In essence I've seen and experienced it far too many times and even though some may see this as an over or knee jerk reaction it's continued to work for me over many years.

@Jimmy that's absolutely fair enough. We each have to make our own decisions and live with the consequences. I'd never second guess another investor's decision, but as a long term holder of $WTC, I was just setting out the rationale for my decision.

It is interesting to note that, during the period of interest to ASIC, RW actually increased his holdings of $WTC, adding Maree Isaac's c. 3% (via her shares in Real Wise) on 24 November 2024. So, if it is ultimately alleged by ASIC that he is an Inside Trader, then I could reasonably argue he's not a very good one!

With the benefit of hindsight, having sold out of $WTC previously in September 2024 at $132, I was far too quick to buy back in once the governance issues blew up. ASIC had indicated they were interested, and so there was always a reasonable chance of an "after-shock" like this.

I just wasn't patient enough. There's a real lesson there.

I know exactly what you're talking about @mikebrisy as I bought back in at $96, although less than 2% of my IRL portfolio. I'm happy to hold for the long run as I do like the company, albeit with all of the surroundings noise and distractions associated with RW. Sometimes you have to take the good with the bad (insert Reece Walsh NRL here) and hope for the prior being better than the latter. That said, I won't be buying further for now, even if the current SP seems well down after the market's usual over-reaction. Would have been nice to not happen on the same day as $CSL's SP fail, but that's investing for you!!

Qantas went through a similar process with Alan Joyce but after he left the share price quickly recovered. Although it can be argued Qantas was less serious as I don't think there was anything regarding insider trading - just Joyce illegally sacking workers and stuff about selling flights that got cancelled. There was lots of support at around $4-$5 just at the price I sold - big mistake!

I think we need to see the same thing here with White shown the door before WTC recovers. Guess that's why I'm still here!

I partially agree with you about Qantas @edgescape , but to be fair, Joyce was not a founder, just someone that was horribly incentivize by the Qantas Board and made every decision with personal gain in mind.

RW is a most definitely a founder/owner/investor and I'm not so sure WTC works better with him gone.

@lowway yes that's the dilemma. But like it or not Wisetech really needs to work on a succession strategy sooner rather than later. Because anything can happen to a VIP. And I'm not even talking about the most recent events

@edgescape a key question on succession is this: is Zubin Appoo really going to be developed to play the full CEO role? I.e., did RW appoint him with eventual succession in mind? I guess that’s something that will unfold over time. At the moment, we’ll get to see how Zubin performs, knowing of course that RW, as Executive Chair, is the ultimate decision-maker for now.

There is a bench of pretty impressive individuals, including some long serving $WTC leaders, on the management team. I think the next year or two will allow us to see what they can really achieve. Some markers of the challenges ahead for management:

• revenue growth trajectory of Cargowise
• rollout of Container Optimisation, and landslide logistics more generally. (This is a big test, with near term proof points)
• integration of E2Open and ability to get it growing again over say the next 2-3 years
• keeping the cost structure lean, to help sustain high margins

That’s a huge agenda for any management team. So, my primary concern is that the ongoing investigations do not unduly distract management from their work. And as I will explain, there is ample opportunity for distraction ahead.

ASIC investigations and eventual proceedings that follow from them could rumble on for years. The next milestone will be the decision by ASIC on whether to take action, That action could be criminal, civil, or administrative.

While obviously I don’t know the full facts, there is enough information in the public domain about a) RW’s share sales, b) the company underperformance in Feb 2025, c) the governance chaos, d) former insiders, who are now outsiders and potentially very willing to help ASIC, and e) RWs behaviour, from which anyone can reasonably see ample opportunity for breakdowns in good practice on timing and process of insider share dealings between late 2024 and early 2025.

From my perspective, it just doesn’t have the hallmarks of the kinds of cases that end up with criminal sanctions. But civil sanctions could also be serious. For example, a potential disqualification order.

So the ASIC decision on what to do is a key milestone. When will that happen? Who knows. It comes down to what evidence do they have. For example, do they need to go back for more? Who do they need to interview? Etc. etc. It could be weeks. But it could be months. Several.

If a civil case results (I.e., including there isn’t any agreement on, for example, an enforceable undertaking) then there could be 2, 3 or more years before the outcome is finally known.

My expectation is that, if civil or criminal charges are laid, then RW and any others charged, would have to stand down. That would be the first significant, actual disruption. In the worst case scenario, we’d see RW and 3 senior leaders removed from the scene. The impact on the business and SP will depend on who they all are.

There are many different paths this can take. My point is, no one should expect a resolution any time soon and this will likely go on for years.

So, there are several scenarios where $WTC is forced to transition to new leadership a lot sooner than RW would choose!

Investment Decision

My investment thesis remains that this is a company that can be managed by others, and my focus is on how the current, wider management team progress in executing the 4 priorities I set out earlier in this post. My investment thesis will be broken if the team starts failing to execute. And because there is a reasonable risk that this happens, I have decided not to increase my shareholding, despite my view that the business is now undervalued.

Equally, I am not anticipating failure. While the operational challenges are significant, this team has an impressive track record. For now I will HOLD through these turbulent times.

Thanks for the insights @mikebrisy. Besides impact on leadership themselves I wonder how much these legal proceedings can impact the company (outside disruptive impacts). Like could the company be fined?

I’m also wonder, whilst it would have taken genius to build Wisetech, the level of embeddness it’s achieved makes it hard to displace. Could it now be a company an idiot could not stuff up? I get the integration with the company they’ve acquired could take work, but really the position of their main software seems untouchable. Maybe one of the most moaty businesses on the asx.

Wisetech reminds me of Oracle in many respects. Oracle is also founder led with Larry Ellison still on the board and also had a rough patch at one stage.

I also notice many have a small allocation of a few percent. I think mine is only 2 percent which is tiny in comparison to my XRF and VYS holding!

It’s an interesting situation. I imagine that patch would have to get pretty rough before customers try to rebuild their global logistics processes around not using Cargo Wise. If that’s even possible at this stage. It’s actually pretty scary the leverage companies like Wisetech hold.