Ann: Notice of Annual General Meeting/Proxy Form, page-47

OMG I hate HC at times. I had just put 15mins into a post that is now in the ether. Faaaarrrrrk. Ok just to summarise. Wasn’t happy with the CR. Over the resentment NOW 7mths on. Have increased shareholding’s by 8X am in the top 20. I state this not as a skite but rather an attempt to convey my trust in management in getting funding for the project. I have only be in the company since the end of 2017 and have rode LPD up and down down down over many years. Several times I could have cashed out higher than my buyin, but nah held the shares back down because in retrospect I was greedy. Note to self - ALWAYS PROTECT YOUR CAPITAL. I participated in the last CR but it was a week after the offer closed did I have much more liquidity at my disposal for cheap shares. So I bought on market and am still fully committed to the company and management getting us through the funding process. I have argued with myself over the pro’s and con’s of a spill to the board, and have come to the conclusion a spill would set the funding process back several months. With the possibility of a spill triggering a “lame duck” BOD’s scenario pushing the company’s coffers into the dregs. Sure we still have a few shares in the Acuity Shares facility but would rather keep that piece of equity held for the SP. Anyhow to the point. I have voted For, against, for and for in the resolutions. Everyone has a vote, everyone should use their votes to express their intention of where they want the company to go. The way I see it, having a vote will take us down one of two paths. Path 1 :- Toward funding with a functioning BOD. Path 2 :- Possibly “Lame Duck” BOD for the next three months, which could put us into further financial difficulties by delaying financial BOD’s decisions. Well that’s how I see it.Anyone voting for path 2 must realise and come to the conclusion we are all in the RED and the only way I see us getting into the green this year or next is by choosing path 1. Anyone having feelings of the vindictive nature and feel as though they have to vote path 2 to be heard. To show disappointment in management of how much money (on paper) they have lost due to the setbacks is (IMO) all for nothing. Imagine that, everyone chooses path two, BOD and management have their hands tied until the spill vote. In this period the bridging finance is paused as well as offtakes as well as SP process. All put on hold due to the shareholders sentiment, which could send the company into bankruptcy. When I lay it out like that regardless of how sheety I was with management, pushing the company over the edge without a better path to success is setting yourself up for failure. No one wants to put the company at risk of bankruptcy with choosing path 2. Do they ???LT-B1