Ann: Appendix 4E and 2020 Annual Financial Report, page-6

I have been thinking about sharing my thoughts about this company for a while and drafted few points, but felt what's the point because of lots of negativity surrounding Icetana in this forum.

Before anyone feels that I might be pumping it because of the rise today, I haven't bought a single share today, but did a few months ago and been holding tight and plan to hold for a few years. My reasons below for peeps interested or frustrated with this stock. I am neither associated with this company, nor a financial advisor, so please take any comments I make with a grain of salt

I totally understand the frustration of holders who bought either during IPO or shortly after anticipating this would be a tech unicorn....it has all the required qualities - tech, AI, tight register, fresh IPO, many deals in the pipeline, interesting target markets etc to name a few. Unfortunately, that didn't transpired because of slow marketing, COVID impacting the target market segments and a range of other reasons. However, I still have decent hopes on this company because of the below reasons:

-> Top20 hold ~80% and directors own a huge chunk, so it's in the interest of the directors to make this company successful. I get the frustration of options they awarded themselves recently in-lieu of pay cuts, but in my view this is a good sign because these are not "free" rights that can be converted to shares on nominal or no cost, these are options with $0.25 or $0.30 exercise price (refer page 13 in the recent annual report), which is double the market cap today. So in order for any director who received these to abuse/take massive advantage of these options the share price has be quite higher that $0.25, in which case all holders would be happy. Moreover, each of these option holders need to shell a lot of their own money to convert these options to shares e.g. the CEO has to pay approx $1.4m to the company to convert these options to equivalent shares. I don't know about others, but I would be very happy to see if this case arises because it means either the CEO is a strong backer of the company or the share price is well north of $0.25 or both! Not to forget that directors can't openly dump their shares after acquisition...even small sells have to be disclosed and are viewed negatively by Mr.Market

-> Contrary to popular opinion here, I actually like the management, including the CEO. Matt was the founding CEO of this company back from 2009, and stepped in again last year to sort the mess that the old CEO (Jeremy) left. Matt, thru his VC fund and personally invested lots of money in this company. He has lots of credentials in tech world in Perth. Whilst he might not be the best salesman, it's unfair to comment him as not a good CEO. I would give him couple of years time before writing him off. You've noticed that he bought $20k shares on-market recently and I bet some of the purchases today and during last few days are from Matt. Yes, he took a bonus of $91k for the IPO raise, but that's quite normal in tech industry where IPO is a huge step for the company. And do look at the prospectus (page 38) please, he spent $50k to buy shares in the IPO, so it's not as if he pocketed all that bonus to spend on drinks. You have to look deeper into the figures in the recent financial reports as well as they include one-off IPO bonuses and implied value of options, rights etc ballooning the figures these guys receive. I personally think Matt with his experience is not overpaid as the CEO. I've seen many CEOs of tech startups with far less that Icetana's product and revenue drawing more salaries and bonuses, but that's only my opinion hey!

-> Why would Kevin Brown with his huge experience at VGW and probably on a higher salaried job in VGW left to join Icetana for $144k (now $115k)? He would be a great asset to the company when time is right. In my view, Icetana is transitioning from one-off payment/revenue model to recurring revenue model, and it would take a while to get this model right. When this becomes a SaaS machine in the future, I think Kevin is perfectly placed to run this

-> Now the price and opinions that this should be at 5c or 3.5c. In tech world, valuations are at multiples of revenues and forward looking, not based on cash position only. I think ICE is undervalued...why? Look at the tables in pages 21 and 22 in the prospectus, and you would notice that Series A shares were issued at an effective price of $0.135 in today's price; Series B, I couldn't exactly figure out, but that was a small issue anyways; Series C shares were issued at an effective price of $0.11 in today's price raising $8m before the IPO. It's very rare that us retail punters get a chance to invest in a tech company at the price levels of series A/B/C rounds which have huge risks attached with unproven products and those risks are mostly mitigated now.

-> Now coming to the tech and the claims that the tech is outdated...I disagree...I understand AI tech and looked at Icetana's patent papers and Matt's explanation of how Icetana uses anomaly vectors (check vimeo if you are interested). The code base is probably outdated, but it's being re-written at the moment as per some articles online and as per the last product update. However, it doesn't take away the fact that the patented algo underneath is still the same and still relevant. The fact that there aren't a lot of companies globally with live customers using similar tech is a testament to the patented tech. Sure, a new company might've grabbed a trial in transport NSW incubator program (this new product detects fights like Icetana does...yes, but not COVID! else they would've been billionaires by now ), but be mindful that typically such govt. incubators don't have big dollars attached...so who knows the criteria for selection and participation in such incubators.

Finally, I believe that Icetana is worth the current market cap (infact a bit more closer to the IPO price). As per unconfirmed sources apparently IPO received $10mil bids for $5mil raise and several applications were scaled back. I am happy to invest and park my money aside waiting for big sales contracts to arrive in few years...if you don't have a risk appetite to wait that long it's understandable why you are frustrated with the performance since IPO.

I think COVID certainly impacted the main sectors (universities, malls etc) they have been aiming at, so I would at least give them one more year to prove themselves. Who knows what would've happened after the Japanese trials in Jan this year if not for COVID. While they are eating up cash, that's because of the company size and activities rather than directors actively eating up all the cash, and it's unfair to call this company relying on Jobkeeper etc for it's survival...they've got $180k for last quarter (page 39 of annual report) where as the sales revenue for the same quarter was $600k and soon they would get another chunk in R&D tax refund.

End of my rant, and if you've come this far reading my blabber...well done

All IMO, please DYOR before investing!