Ann: ANZ 1H 2020 Results Presentation & Investor Discussion Pack, page-169

"A company the size of a major bank is clearly capable of ensuring that all shareholders are treated equally. Why not use a renounceable raising model?"

Because even renounceable raisings do not have anywhere near full participation, resulting in a lot of the newly-issued shares ending up in the hands of the underwriting brokers and sub-underwriters (who charge hefty fees for the privilege) and which often results in a sloppy after-market given the underwriting brokers do not have the balance sheets, nor the inclination to hold onto stock for long.


"The fact that you prefer a form of raising that provides an opportunity for particular types of investor (Institutional and a minority of Retail Holders) at the expense of others is clearly your preference. "

Show me where I said I preferred it.
It is what it is.

If I benefit from it because I am both inclined to participate and am also appropriately prepared, what of it?

That is no different to me benefiting at someone else's expense by purchasing an undervalued share which that person has unwittingly sold to me (or benefiting by selling an overvalued share to someone whose ultimate loss is my avoidance of loss).

By the same token, sometimes - more often than I'd prefer - I buy/sell shares poorly, which benefits the counter-party(ies) to those trades, at my expense.

That's simply the nature of capital markets.

Everyone acts in their own self-interest.
Everyone invests to maximise their investment returns.

No one invests their money with a view to sharing their profits among other less successful market participants.

The stock market isn't some kind of giant financial commune where profits and losses are all socialised.

There are winners and their are losers.

Deal with it.

.