Whilst I believe your circumstance looks exactly like the kind of shareholder who was more likely to receive full allocation, I don't think the below statement is fair...
"To top it off, seeing full allocation given to internal management made me feel worst as at least in principle management could have decided to scale back on its own allocation - in solidarity with the loyal shareholders".
The problem with this is, if management didn't buy their full allocation, some people could make the wrong conclusion or some could use this to say that they didn't believe in their own company. That they weren't putting their money where their mouth was.
In this situation they were damned if they did and damned if they didn't.
IMO, Dr Tillet and other large holders agreeing to this SPP were actually incredibly generous, they have taken a big dilution to afford this opportunity to the rest of us small players. $30K for everyone - limiting the top 20 to the same amount, is nothing I've ever seen before. IMO, you can't get much more egalitarian than that!
The algorithmic nature of the distribution process with the company stating from the get-go, the kind of preferences which would be built into that, was up-front and very clear in the details of the original SPP announcement.
Maybe there was an error or glitch in your personal circumstance and you did actually qualify for full allocation? If that is the case, I hope this can be somehow assessed again? Wishing you all the best and hope you work out what the issue was that resulted in your lower than expected allocation.
RAC Price at posting:
$3.29 Sentiment: Buy Disclosure: Held
(20min delay)