> The section I labelled as nonsense research was the stuff about the £2m. What is the relevance of that?

>> Addressing the small balance sheet is of direct relevance.

> This article is not his worst offending

Your attitude toward the author isn't a critique of the article, which is short and easily verifiable in its claims.

Having preexisting beef is not a useful source criticism when the facts are so easy to check.

> but it is HN policy to replace articles with more substantive and less emotive ones if possible.

The FT article is not more substantive wrt the Ayanda Capital deal.