Ann: Trading Halt, page-105

You are kidding yourself. What is brilliant about a failed discounted 1+1 cap-raise, followed by an almost identical proposed cap-raise for less than half the previous .08c price we languished at awaiting the news of success of PL5, which they have now released.

Those with knowledge of broker activity reported the .065 discount did not have take up. The management team would have had knowledge way in advance that this raise was needed. They did nothing to manage market expectations, in fact they stated the opposite. They still have only done the bare minimum in terms of corpoate communication. You read the threads here, shareholders are largely in the dark. Some with high level technical knowledge have done really good work reading between the lines.

DM does not exhibit such a good understanding of the tech, nor does he articulate 4DS value proposition well, he did not raise finds successfully and he continues to mislead shareholders. The explanation for the cancellation of the previous capital raise was "It was decided it was not in the best interests of share holders". That is untruthful. How is the same raise at lower price - more dilution, more in the interests of share holders?The discussion in the forum was why was DM telling shareholders one thing and PH another. Turns out PH was describing exactly what was happening.

DM needs to go, he's not equipped for the role. Vote him out, we need someone more capable at this juncture. Now is the time, while we wait for external parties to complete these technical developments the BOD can get busy finding another chairman with industry experience.