PharmAust - Now that is impressive, page-50

........my take on the up sizing of 10%. ...........

Hi AD. Not sure if you mean an additional 10% in the year to add to the 15% that is not required to be voted on = 25% in the one year. See following note from ASX.

"Under listing rule 7.1, every listed entity has the ability to issue 15% of its issued capital without security holder approval in a 12 month period. Only eligible entities that have obtained security holder approval by special resolution at an AGM have the ability to issue an additional 10% of issued capital in a 12 month period under listing rule 7.1A."

So unless I am having serious brain fog it goes something like this ( & lets disregard discounts for now).
1. Issued capital = price X # shares issued so lets round it off to say currently 315 mil shares at price $.013 = $41 mil so 25% aprox $10 mil.
If the price of raise was average $.20 then the it could raise $15.7 mil.

Note 1: If this came wholly from a single outside source then we would obviously have a new substantial shareholder (25% of issued capital, possibly more if issue price is discounted). why would they want that ?
Note 2. If they passed the hat around to existing s/h at say silly figure of max $5K ea then possibly the 402 club could kick in first $2 mil
Note 3. Maybe the BoD just want this option available to add strength to some negotiations.

OK, personally dont have an in-principal problem with raising more capital, so natural position would be to vote yes BUT have to ask what it is to be used for. Faith in the BoD is one thing but blind faith entirely another. I am 100% positive that the answer would be to add value to the business however less convinced at this point in time (due lack of communicating clear pathway and priorities so far) whether that would be specifically by advancing existing projects - dogs cancer to phase IIB / partner phase III, etc or whether it would include new and or, early stage projects only recently or yet to be announced.

Obviously I as I am sure would all shareholders (that includes the BoD holders) would prefer to raise new capital at a higher price and that is the second reason for wanting a statement regards a clear pathway forward with the priority to bring value to the business that will drive increased share price. I don't believe I am the only one that has that concern lack of messaging.

So emotionally I would tend to vote yes to the additional 10% however unless there is a more compelling reason set out in the meantime then objectively I have to lean towards a no vote at this time. What other tool do shareholders have. This by the way would not prevent the BoD raising the 15% limit and then complete a rinse and repeat (cleansing) later in the year.
All just personal opinion and would very much appreciate the counter arguments so pls DYOR.