Intergroup Mining Limited – Three Failed IPO Attempts and Suppressed Disclosure

Intergroup Mining Limited has attempted to list publicly on three separate occasions, each effort ultimately failing after regulatory scrutiny and whistleblower disclosures raised serious concerns about governance, disclosure, and financial integrity. These failures are not incidental. They form part of a documented pattern of unsuccessful attempts to access public capital markets while avoiding proper regulatory oversight.

Matthew Butler’s Documented Role

In papers submitted to the Fair Work Commission, Matthew Butler is expressly documented as having “helped to design the IPO” of Intergroup Mining. This admission is significant.

Designing an IPO involves:

• Structuring the corporate vehicle;

• Advising on disclosure pathways and jurisdictional choices;

• Managing accounting treatment and financial presentation;

• Selecting the listing venue perceived to be most permissive.

Butler’s involvement places him at the centre of the strategic decision-making behind Intergroup’s repeated attempts to go public, rather than as a passive adviser.

Three Failed Listing Attempts

Intergroup Mining pursued listings through multiple jurisdictions and mechanisms, each time seeking access to retail or public investors. All three attempts failed following whistleblower interventions that raised substantiated concerns with regulators, including:

• ASIC

• Toronto Stock Exchange (TSX)

• NASDAQ

These whistleblower disclosures provided regulators with documentary evidence relating to:

• Related-party transactions;

• Conflicted advisers and governance failures;

• Misleading or incomplete disclosure;

• Links to prior failed entities and sanctioned individuals;

• Risks to investors not adequately disclosed in offering materials.

Each time, the proposed listing stalled or collapsed once regulators were placed on notice.

Regulatory Blocking Through Whistleblowing

It is important to emphasise that the IPO failures were not market-driven. They followed regulatory intervention triggered by whistleblower reports, which highlighted that the proposed listings did not meet the standards required for public markets.

These interventions were undertaken in good faith, through formal channels, and supported by evidence. They served their intended purpose: protecting investors and market integrity.

Scrubbing of Public Record

Following the collapse of these IPO attempts, all reference to the failed listings has been scrubbed from the Intergroup Mining website and public promotional materials. There is no disclosure to current or prospective investors that:

• Multiple IPO attempts were made;

• Each attempt failed following regulatory scrutiny;

• The failures were linked to whistleblower disclosures;

• Senior advisers involved in designing the IPOs remain connected to the company.

This omission is itself material. Investors assessing Intergroup Mining today are denied access to a critical part of its history—one that goes directly to governance, credibility, and regulatory compliance.

Why This Matters

Repeated failed IPOs are not merely commercial setbacks. When combined with:

• The involvement of advisers later implicated in other frauds;

• The active suppression of adverse history;

• The recycling of corporate vehicles and narratives,

they indicate an attempt to circumvent regulation rather than comply with it.

Public markets rely on full and honest disclosure. Scrubbing failed IPOs from the record undermines that foundation and exposes future investors to undisclosed risk.

Why This Is Documented Here

This website documents Intergroup Mining’s failed IPO attempts because regulatory history cannot be erased simply by deleting webpages. The public record must reflect what occurred, who was involved, and why these listings failed.

Transparency is not optional. Where it is absent, scrutiny becomes essential.