The trouble is company management (and this goes for a lot of...

The trouble is company management (and this goes for a lot of small caps on the ASX) just don;t get it... when it comes to CR
The fall in the SP since the CR is entirely predictable and just illustrates the core problem here..
A 1-for-17 "pro rata non-renounceable entitlement offer" - and here is the key thing "at the same price as the Placement" is not the same as a non renounceable rights issue.
The key word here is entitlement vs rights.
A renounceable right is just that - a right. Look up the dictionary definition. A right is something you have above someone else, or to quote one definition "A legally enforceable claim held by someone as the result of specific events or transactions".
In this case the specific event or transaction is that of the existing shareholder : they own the stock. They therefore have the right to purchase (over those that don't)
Now in the case here (and like I said) so many other ASX CR (as well) it looks like they designed the raising to also include giving an opportunity to investors who don't previously hold the stock.. the previous "placement"...
What this does is dilute the existing shareholders in effect before they are even offered their "entitlement"..
And the problem here is if you continue to raise capital like this (by offering it to potential investors outside the shareholder base) these people have the option all the time, of sitting back and never committing to buy on market. And the existing shareholder continually gets diluted.
What's the point of previously owning? there is no need.. these guys just get offered stock all the time, without any commitment and this keeps their risk of commitment to zero.. with each CR "offered", they have the benefit over existing shareholders of assessing the CR "on offer" without taking any holding risk at all.
That is an unfair advantage to those who don't previously hold ("commit") over those investors who already do.
It should be the other way around!
But it can get worse. Way worse. In a world of HFT, front running, and insider info (I am not saying this is occurring here... just using a generic description) this advantage over existing holders can also be gamed to the advantage of brokers and the big end of town who are also involved in setting up such offers.
The only way to cut them out of this advantage, is to always and only raise with proper rights issues..
That is rights issues that do just that... give existing shareholders a 100% right to accept and anyone else ZERO..
In other words the only way you get to participate in any companies capital is to currently own stock in the company.
I get it.. (so didn't participate) ...does anyone else?
Just MO/NA