Ann: Update on Institutional Placement and Entitlement Offer, page-65

"I don't know why $97m was the magic number that Mesoblast wanted, but neither do you."

Fact is, MSB management and directors did.
They had earmarked that capital for certain purposes and/or with specific budgetary considerations in mind. Said considerations - whatever they were - are now not going to be able to be fulfilled.
(Well, the total identified had better been for specific budgetary purposes, because if that wasn't the case, it would reflect pretty woeful governance and capital management oversight)

"Price per share no less than the Issue Price" - so if we get good news, they can ask for this to be higher than 30c - right?"

As has been stated before: Sure, just like usual placements conducted by the company in the past.

And just like usual placements, that's how those who short-sold ahead of the placement, get to cover their short positions.


"MSB's register and any potential control impacts" - this is at the discretion of MSB directors. So why would they disadvantage Mesoblast if good news were available?"

Objectively, MSB directors have not used that discretion very well, given how they have been happy to let short-positions get covered during placements, time and time again.

.