Cap raise - July 21, page-49

Where do I start?

After all I am just a retail investor with a small amount of skin in the game. I do laugh at how investors get classified as "sophisticated" just because of the amount money they have in a bank account. I am embarrassed to have put any money on this table, but those who have outlaid enough to be significant investors don't appear to be very sophisticated to me.

A "reporting error" is just that. Corrective action requires replacing the number and nothing more. When a "reporting error" leads to management making significant operational decisions, it ceases to be an isolated "reporting error". "Reporting errors" don't threaten the viability of a business as a going concern. "Reporting errors" don't require a capital raise to correct, let alone a massively discounted one.

If a CFO provides the CEO/BOD with a "number". It is beholden on the CEO/BOD to ensure its accuracy BEFORE announcing it to the world in big flashing lights.

Why would a CEO want to mislead in circumstances like this? Maybe because he wants to maintain his lifestyle and get paid? Often these personalities are so egotistical, they will do whatever it takes to stay in a position of power.

Under this leadership, we remain in a continuous loop of capital raises and debt restructuring. The last restructure was for $20m of debt and cost $10m in aggregated exit fees. DM loves to put lipstick on his pigs. Let's pretend we're going to pay off debt and save interest, when in reality we will just borrow the money back before the next 4C is due. Oh, and that "interest saving", let's also pretend we will turn 100% of it into inventory and sell it at a healthy profit margin. Oh, look this wig, stockings and suspenders are also a perfect fit for my pig!!

As a retail holder, I have to rely on unsubstantiated information on a public message board. The company remains in suspension. Clearly the ASX has other concerns, which BUD refuse to acknowledge. They are pretty obvious though to anyone with a level head and common sense. Lack of Board Independence may be one, given a majority currently have an executive role within the company.

Now, why do I hold? To put it simply: I believe in the business but have lost all faith in the CEO.

How can Buddy Ohm not be a success in an environment where companies are actively seeking to be more energy efficient? Either Ohm is not the product DM claims it to be, or the leadership is inept at commercialising a product that should sell itself.

Then there's LIFX. The theory behind the acquisition is sound, but its execution has been one disaster after another. It shouldn't be that hard. Make stuff for less than you sell it, but make sure you you don't run out of money along the way.

In my opinion, BUD will only realise its potential with the replacement of the CEO.