Ann: Update on reinstatement to official quotation, page-18

"... its securities will be reinstated to official quotation on ASX Limited on a date to be decided by ASX subject to the Company satisfying various conditions precedent typical for a transaction of this type. The Company is working to satisfy these conditions precedent as soon as possible and will inform the market of the date of reinstatement to official quotation on ASX as soon as it is available."

The company is working to satisfy these conditions means that they have not yet satisfied all the ASX requirements! Otherwise, they would have been listed!!

If you refer to their prospectus dated 4 December 2015, the timeframe provided was (reproduced):

- Despatch of holding statements - 24 December 2015
- Re-compliance with Chapters 1 and 2 of the ASX Listing Rules - 4 January 2015
- Re-quotation of Shares (including Shares issued under the Offers) on ASX - 7 January 2015

If there were a competent company, they would have taken proactive steps in a correct and timely manner in order to ensure that their shares are relisted on ASX on 7 January 2016. It's a joke when it is now 26 January 2016 and they are only now providing an official update (seriously a very late update considering they were suppose to be listed about 3 weeks ago!!) that "The Company is working to satisfy these conditions precedent as soon as possible and will inform the market of the date of reinstatement to official quotation on ASX". Name one competent company who originally stated to list on a particular date and then remain silent for 3 weeks when listing still hasn't gone through. Yes, no competent company would show such neglect. The fact that they are only now providing an update of this sort (while their diehard followers with too much invested in this speculative company frantically pestering ASX on when the relisting will occur) shows that they don't know their stuff, and does not know how to manage this relisting in a timely and correct manner. Rather they need ASX to spoon feed them on what they need to do and what further conditions they need to satisfy.

They have a LONG HISTORY OF NOT GETTING THINGS RIGHT!!!! All the rampers would like to say that all is history now.. bright future ahead etc etc and with vonex on board, things will be different. LOOK NOW! What is the difference in management outcome? Undue delay in relisting. No official updates to explain the situation for about 3 weeks! And LOOK AT THE PROSPECTUS, they can't even get the 7 January 2016 date correct (it was stated as 7 January 2015 instead of 7 January 2016 (which I have reproduced above). This shows carelessness, which no wonder things are getting held up when they can't even get simple things correct.

During this 3 weeks period (without any official updates from the company), the diehard followers made up any excuses possible under the sun for the company! everything and anything except any possible fault of the company itself. Skyscraper was convinced that it was because ASX prioritize regular listings over such a relisting for more fees! This is just ludicrous and frankly... a very desperate attempt to make ASX the scapegoat! Also blaming ASX perth for being so slow, not doing their job, etc etc. Like i said before, you dont need to look far to see a very similar relisting by BRN!!! They were spot on with their relisting (having relisted on 22 September 2015 exactly as originally indicated!). And guess what, they are in PERTH too! So its really nothing to do with the staff at ASX perth not being able to do their job, etc. This shows that the management at BRN knew what they were doing and took the correct steps in a timely manner to have the stock relisted on time. It's not difficult when one knows what they are doing!!

The only reason why these diehard followers are making up all these excuses for the company's failures is that they have too much invested in them to think otherwise (or too scared to think otherwise). Continue to be believe in this management as you will, but time and time again (including now!), they have proven otherwise.