Just to continue on how things could have been done differently...

Just to continue on how things could have been done differently with Regal & Bombora (R&B).

Without cross promoting and being mindful of moderation, Regal recently came on board at PET. No new shares were issued but the management team sold down just under 5% of their combined holdings to bring them on board. The reasoning and wording in the announcement is interesting. (Regal aren't mentioned, but it's them that came on board and it appears they didn't get everything they wanted).

https://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20190902/pdf/44843bqmj4n9pl.pdf

Could VOR have considered a similar approach?

If the VOR directors or a combination of the T5 shareholders were to sell approx 5% via an OMT to R&B what price would they have struck the agreement at? Would it have been at .0085? Would it have been higher?

As part of the deal could R&B have then bought out the November options and exercised them? That way the could have still had their combined 9.72% stake and the company could have less dilution, more liquidity, quality funds on board, but $1m less for now.

Did R&B have to come on board at the same time and with the same entry price?

I appreciate there's no right answer to these transactions and we don't know exactly what management has on its radar, but as shareholders we should reflect on whether the best deal was struck or not.

Jonkey made a really good point yesterday. "A company who does what they say, looks after its holders usually have tight registers and instos would need to pay a premium for a decent stake".

TenX - you said yesterday that you liked the announcement but that "I personally would have handled it differently". If you get the chance can you expand on that? Is it more you would have hoped for a higher price and/or a different approach or structure to the deal?

I know there's no right answer, but I'm interested in broadening my perspective.