"co-incidences"..?, page-63

A

Quite right - this from the 2007 report:

"On 5 September 2007, the company entered into a $15M Equity Line of Credit with Fortrend Securities. The Equity Line of Credit will enable the company to continue with its commercialisation of the Coldry™ technology and further advance its other technology and provide working capital."

Also this:

"During the financial year the Company raised $2.0M in funds through a convertible note and a little over $0.4M through the exercise of equity and seed options issued in 2005 on the Company re-listing on the ASX."

So I ask myself, what was the SP and amount of shares and options on issue at that time - 30/6/07:

SP = 18c
ESI = 261 million
Options = 11 million

Fast forward 5 years:

We now have "good faith negotiations" ann with your comment A "with a quality CSI Monash/IMFA whom will HOLD the stock and GROW the business."

$4 million pending for 300 mill ESI and 300 mill ESIO.

As at 30/12/11:

SP = .06c - but I'll use todays 2c
ESI = 1.3 billion
ESIO = close to 1 billion

So, what has been achieved in that 5 years considering the 2007 funding was ann'ed to "continue with its commercialisation of the Coldry™ technology and further advance its other technology and provide working capital."

So for a SP decrease of 16c, an increase of over 1 billion ESI on issue and a MASSIVE increase in ESIO and with serious $millions and $millions spent ($15 mill with Fortrend alone), how far has Coldry progressed?

DFT still not complete and more money needed to be raised for DFT2 and 3!

So A, the Q is not whether Coldry has legs or is the No 1 tech as spuiked by many here, the Q is considering the SP depreciation over 5 years, share and options dilution and dollars spent to date and dollars still needing to be spent, will ESI financially survive to see Coldry into commercial production and what will ESI/ESIO be worth by then and how many on issue?

That is the $100 million question isn't it?

Hopefully the line of funding available to MNM through Fortrend will be better managed and the dollars actually used to progress the projects far better than the $15 mill ESI management (at that time) had at their disposal.

Where has that money gone?

Time will tell.

K

PS Please note, the ESI v MNM funding post was posted on the MNM thread and it has been other ESI posters that have brought and posted it here!