Ann: Quarterly Activities Report and Appendix 4C, page-29

I think your comment regarding voting is too broad to be accurate.

I agree with being a united company with regards to remuneration, options, auditor changes, etc, if they are what has been agreed to and are in the best interest of the company. After all, we have elected them to represent and lead the co.

I agree that defensively, it was wise to raise some funds for the worst case and to limit overhang with concerns around future funding. Albeit, we all wish these were at higher prices regardless of the price.

Personally, I believe the additonal placement above the capacity and the carrot of SPP shows weekness, desperation and mistrust. The BOD went into TH stating terms of raise and amount were x and then for whatever reason (Looks to be strong armed by broker) came out with y resulting in additional and in my opionion unnecessary dilution. I think it looks worse that they offered a peace offering SPP to get the vote across.

It would have shown me stronger character and faith in the company had they simply done a raise for 8m to instros and moved on. Now we have this overhang for the next few weeks where only a few may take up the offer and what may be embarrassment at the AGM votes. If it had been a straight raise with no frills, extras or SPP the talk of this subject would have been long past and SP back >10.