ann secures 19.6 mill strategic investment, page-44

What a gift to our new partner. 2.4cps, they have got to be kidding! Why not put a premium on the value of the company at this stage with so many positives?. Announcement that 19% of company being handed over to a totally unknown (to shareholders) third party at a discounted price of 2.4cps when last traded at 2.6cps and only a few days ago was higher still at 2.8 - 3cps. Now we know why the share value fell over this last week when shareholders who were not in the know thought it would in fact have increased. What inside information caused this retraction....one can speculate?????? Not good for directors' reputations and certainly not good for those that bought at plus 24 cents.

All the hard work has been done. Successful trial mine completed. Mining lease been applied for (though we now find out it has been drastically delayed from initially indicated timing by directors). No problems with traditional owners, etc. Moved away from self funding growth while we have millions in the bank. Strategy for advancement well accepted by shareholders and certainly continually reinforced by management as the way to go.

Also, Gold price at highest level for many months with possibility of going much higher in near term due to reductions in world production, China and India soaking up vast amounts, and world banks selling off huge quantities of the same item to many different buyers. A wanted resource with limited capacity to meet demand.

In my view, we simply do not need to sell such a significant amount of the company for such a low entry point. Surely there would have been other institutions who would have offered a much better deal than that placed on the table in this announcement. How, when and why did this deal ever get started? Did they approach our company? When did our corporate strategy for the future actually change? If there were substantial reasons for a change why was it not advertised and announced to shareholders and the broader market so that alternative offers could have placed on the table? Too many questions without answers.

Is this just another example of how directors run the show in Australia, by totally disregarding the interests of the existing shareholders. Not happy at all.