When we started this Shareholder Action, it was always with the...

When we started this Shareholder Action, it was always with the intent of it being inclusive, every shareholder that contacted us and pledged support that wanted to be included as part of the Substantial Holders, were welcomed and encouraged too.

This was what we wanted, shareholders small and large, mum and dads to be given a voice, to have an actual say to the outcome of what remaining capital we had remaining after investing in FFX.

Correlating data into an every growing spreadsheet was time consuming, at the time when we went to the lawyer, there was 178 shareholders on our list.

The magnitude of work involved with having that many shareholders participating wasn't a deterrent for us, we were up for it! We wanted to flex our muscle and show the Company we had early numbers, not only the amount of shareholders but more importantly the percentage of SOI.

The lawyers advice to trim down the amount of holders participating was a combination of:
~ the amount of work for her to get all the data into the appropriate document form for signing/lodging
~ proof reading, checking and cross checking each shareholders details (spreadsheet v registry v document)
~ then getting that information into a platform for digital signing (docusign) - this in itself is time consuming, each person is assigned by their email address and entry is all manual
~ orchestrating the actual signing
~ it would be costly exercise

Franky and I discussed this at length, it was a decision we thought was logical and sensible, still a bit disappointing though, and I apologise on behalf of us both for not achieving what we initially set out to do.

The Company is wasting enough money now, we didn't want to contribute to that, which would have been the case had we gone with the 178 shareholders, given that not only the cost to us for the services of our lawyer, but also the extra cost of the Company funded lawyers going over every detail of documents served looking for fault to reason rejecting the served document.

That is the reasoning behind the reduced numbers of participants, the 6% of shares held by the Substantial Shareholders is only the tip of the iceberg though, and as @camban pointed out, we have the percentages to block if needed.

++ The Substantial Holders share block, your shares and the other 250+ shareholders that have committed support (still increasing) for this action, will be invaluable when it comes time to vote. It will be when us mum and dads, all us small fries combined get to flex our muscle to send the message home that we have had enough, time to leave and don't let the door hit you on the way out.

Any shareholders that may think having a small holding won't make a difference, "au contraire" indeed you will!
It isn't just about the shares, or just about having your say, it is more importantly about being heard and if the Company won't listen to a sole shareholder when they speak, then they will certainly pay attention when one becomes a group of many.

cheers
@franky1 seems as I am talking about you, thought I better tag you in