Gccc12Mate, let me make this absolutely clear, I understand that...

Gccc12
Mate, let me make this absolutely clear, I understand that Les is a stand in CEO, But I also understand that Les is an Executive /Non Executive Director as well, going back to NOV 2019, so years.

These are separate positions in AUZ that do not arise from my imagination, see below the public record.


I wish to place on record, that I do not have a problem with LES, I am sure he is a nice guy, that he works hard.
But that is not the point here

The capital raise prospectus that was published is an official company document that is legally binding upon AUZ.
Are you saying that the prospectus is a lie, when it says the following, that
(Each of the directors of Australian Mines has committed to take up their entitlement in full under the Entitlement Offer.)

Gccc12, Mate that statement is very important and in light of the past history of AUZ,
- That statement is a leading statement, is a core sell statement.
- That statement is an influencing statement.
- That statement can be used by some as reason enough to participate in the capital raise.
- That statement could be taken as forward guidance of positive outcome showing additional financial commitment by directors.
So when 25% of the directors did not participate in accordance with the guidance put forward in a legal document, there is a problem with the prospectus guidance. IT IS MISLEADING.

There are four directors and only 3 participated, I repeat.
(Each of the directors of Australian Mines has committed to take up their entitlement in full under the Entitlement Offer.)

NOTE: If I was a very pissed off Sophisticated Investor that felt aggrieved by what has happened to the share price subsequently and I used any one or all four of the above, I would have strong grounds for a refund of my money. In my opinion, to be tested.
If you have buyers remorse ???