I wrote the following on the LIS thread today. It is relevant to...

I wrote the following on the LIS thread today. It is relevant to PPK because (1) PPK as the largest shareholder in LIS is responsible for this state of affairs and should do something to fix it, and (2) the comments I make apply equally to PPK as they do to LIS.

The LIS Newsletter was pleasant to read and had nice pictures. But, shareholders rightly should ask: what is the purpose of the Newsletter? Who is its target audience? Will any potential investor who has read the Newsletter be motivated to buy LIS stock on market?

My sense is that answer to these questions is missing and nobody will be motivated to buy shares on the back of this. If this is the case, what is its purpose and could not LIS be communicating more effectively with existing and potential new shareholders?

Investors and potential investors want to know:

When will Li-Nanomesh be commercialised and what are the commercialisation milestones. LIS has said that Li-Nanomesh has the potential to be its first commercial product. Shareholders deserve a clear market update saying when commercialisation can be expected (as precisely in which year) and the key steps on the path to that commercialisation (target dates and performance objectives). LIS should report to shareholders against a public commercialisation timeline on a regular basis (half yearly). LIS should quantify the scale of the potential market opportunity to it from Li-Nanomesh (in the other way other companies quantify their potential market opportunities).

Another example is the technical progress regarding the LIS batteries themselves. At the time of the IPO one chart was produced showing specific capacity and cycles. One might expect that with technical progress there might be improvements in the specific capacity achieved and a closer approximation to the theoretical limits. But, no further information has been provided to shareholders. In addition, what are the other key battery performance metrics being achieved and is LIS achieving better performance outcomes over time?

Some of the Newsletter tells shareholders of the efforts the Company is making trying to build relationships with industry partners. This is to be commended. But, just as important if not more important, is that LIS effectively and fully communicate with existing shareholders and potential new shareholders. The LIS Board has a fiduciary duty to maximise value for shareholders and for the full value of the Company to be discounted in the share price. Sadly, one can say with confidence that the Company is signally failing in this regard and shows no signs of recognising this to be a problem or that it should properly take steps to fix this.

It seems that LIS has no strategies whatsoever to promote the stock to institutional investors, venture capital funds, environmental and social funds, etc. to buy LIS stock. The Newsletters do not cut the mustard in this regard and is totemic of the failure of to bring motivated and savvy global investors on-board for what should be an exciting investment. The absence of rudimentary commercial acumen and understanding of capital markets, and the need to provide appropriate risk adjusted rewards to shareholders is both astonishing a wonder to behold.

LIS has potentially world-competitive battery technologies and shareholders have provided long-term funding to the Company. But, literally, who in the world-wide investment universe would know this is the case? Seemingly no-one!! The LIS Board should responsibly begin reciprocating to shareholders and start to fulfil its fiduciary duties. This means to properly and professionally communicate to shareholders - and potential new shareholders - on an ongoing, substantive and detailed basis. It should as a matter of course systematically identify and reach out to potential new cornerstone investors (i.e., US and Asian venture capital funds, and global environmental funds). I urge the Chairman and CEO of LIS to begin doing so.