Ann: Scheme Booklet registered with ASIC, page-121

These opinions need to be considered carefully. From my perspective I plan to vote no and deal with the fallout, but these facts need to be acknowledged:

1. ResApp's bank account is basically empty. The Scheme Booklet states that the company has spend all of its own working capital on the takeover. The funds contributed by Pfizer are probably already mostly spent, and any balance is earmarked for the Covid-19 test, not funding continuing operations.
2. If the takeover fails there will definitely be a sudden rush for the exit.
3. Therefore the company will have to raise capital pretty much instantly if the takeover fails.
4. The only three options are: a) go to the financial institutions at a discount to whatever the share price is at the time, b) find an ethical investor(s) prepared to pay a premium on humanitarian or scientific grounds, c) wind up.

Personally I'm in favour of pushing through, re-funding, and working on the company's core business case:

1. The most significant technological advance in acoustic respiratory diagnosis since the invention of the stethoscope.
2. A suite of clinically proven, stable, diagnostic targets that includes some of the most serious debilitating and lethal respiratory conditions.
3. A remote-diagnosis tool perfectly aligned with current market conditions of limited patient appetite for attending crowded clinics in person.
4. An opportunity to deploy a lifeline to the most downtrodden and vulnerable groups in the world, no matter where they are.
5. A foundation that can have additional conditions added over time. Covid-19 is one such condition, it's a pity that we have allowed a potential accessory to the core product eclipse the entire operation.

Those of you who are not able to bear possibility of a slump should consider ways to deal with that risk.

I'd also like to see a considerable improvement in the company's risk management and contingency planning in the future.