I respect the views expressed by other posters here but I just don't think that neither was the decision to proceed with the heavily discounted capital raise taken lightly nor naivety on the part of the board.
Why? Self interest ultimately prevails.
Based on the FY21 annual report, Malcolm Pradhan, Ray Blight and Kate Quirke collectively own approximately 25 percent of Alcidion. Two of those individuals sit on the current board, with the other individual being the ex chairperson of the company.
Unless they see compelling reasons for the acquisition and likelihood for good long term gains, I just cannot reasonably see them agreeing to taking such a massive haircut to their holdings. We also know that Kate Quirke is also subscribing to an additional $250,000 worth of shares as part of the institutional right entitlement component. This is not a small sum of money in my view.
As someone who has been on the Alcidion's journey since its inception, I have experienced many highs and many more lows. This is just another chapter to the Alcidion journey.
If you feel strongly against the heavily discounted capital raise or a particular issue, please raise the matter directly with the Chairperson/Managing Director to seek a response. I would strongly encourage you, should you wish, to do the same. I have done so, expressing my disappointment and seeking further clarification from individuals who ultimately signed off on the decision. In doing so, I also obtained a level of comfort for my decision to back the Board/Management this time round, despite how painful the current share price is for me personally.
No matter what, I cannot fault the company for their engagement with an ordinary retail shareholder such as myself, from the Chairperson, Directors, CEO, Managing Director and Chief Financial Officer. Through my interaction with them, I found them to genuine and receptive. They could have taken the easy option to refer me to investor relations or other individuals but each of them have always found the time and effort to communicate directly with me.
But please do not take my word for it. As much as you can read information posted by other people here on HotCopper, one just cannot tell if the information is true or not. Take everything you read here (including mine) with a grain of salt. Nothing beats hearing straight from the horse's mouth.
The decision has been made and the proceed button pushed. We are pretty much at the point of no return (unless the acquisition and/or underwriting falls over for whatever reason). I see my responsibility now, as a shareholder whose holdings have been diluted, is to hold them to account:
(1) Board - for the decisions that they signed off (e.g. acquisition, capital raise and strategic decisions),
(2) Management - integration of Silverlink and execution of the corporate strategy,
(3) Remuneration - making an informed choice on how I vote and putting forward proposals for better alignment in the remuneration of key executives (for example, proposing remuneration is not overwhelming based on top line revenue which can be acquired rather than achieved via organic growth or focusing more on per share metrics)
We can continue to be on board the journey or decide it is not for us and depart at the next stop. The choice would be dependent on our own individual circumstances. Sometimes, we might even have to wear a loss in making our choice. But it is all part of our investment, where nothing is guaranteed.
Expand
(20min delay)