The breach happened in the context of the delayed EM funds. Was...

The breach happened in the context of the delayed EM funds. Was it $3,000,000? Can't remember. (Just waiting for that rubber stamp from the Chinese government).

Regarding the current matter, have I got this right? If there was a meeting as required, shareholder approval would have been sought to raise $500,000 from Fred. The associated convertible note would have increased his shareholding by ? 50000 to 100,000 shares. Fred already has over 6,000,000 shares, His shareholding would have increased by about 0.31% of total shares on issue. Failing to raise the funds may have meant the company was insolvent. Fred, his family, and friends probably hold over 50% of shares and voting rights. Most likely, the motion would have been passed.

The way it is now, Fred loans the company $500,000 at 12% interest.

I have seen many ASX directors freely generate substantial shares bonuses for themselves for all sorts of reasons without outlaying any funds.

No doubt there is a technical breach. The ASX needs to ensure that shareholders are treated fairly. Is this a major issue? Are we hard done by? Should someone be shot at dawn?