Ann: Annual General Meeting Chair's Address, page-144

On (3) I hope that is a misinterpretation, because if it's not, it's utter BS. The ADN price was only briefly at 40ish, but there was plenty of scope to do a capital raise in the high 20's. It has nothing to do with MEP as they were obviously talking to MEP when the CR was done. However, there was no certainty of a transaction etc. so from a continuous disclosure viewpoint - crucial in cap raises - they can genuinely hide behind that.

On (4) that's executive stuff - end of story. You'll be asking for board papers next.

I'd caution you about this "we are getting a great deal" BS on the MEP transaction. It's not a win-lose, it should be a "win-win".

Finally on RG and AS. AS is effectively a stockbroking analyst with some commercial experience. RG is an exploration company Director. Any good Director knows where their skill set is. You wouldn't put Catherine Livingstone in charge of an explorer with $5m in the tin & some interesting ground because it's not her skill set. The type of Directors who get companies up off the floor are usually not the ones to take them beyond a certain point. So if they are optimistic about the company, they find a better credentialed replacement, keep plenty of shares, have a slap up dinner and move on. That's how they keep their reputation and move on to the next project. That's where RG and AS are at. They've done their bit getting JM and the projects to this stage. The next step is not their skill set (IMHO hard to work out what AS skill set actually is?). Now their job is to find their replacements of high quality in tandem with the other Directors with the minimum of disruption. It's clear from the comments of those who were there and the desultory PoS that RG served up as a Chair's address that if ADN has the same board in 12months time, the shares may not have a "1" in front of them - and it won't be a "2" or "3" either.