Ann: PharmAust Completes Share Purchase Plan, page-80

- Okay this is the last ill write about this as I don't really have the time for it, However, lets go through your responses here.

"MT has done a shocking job in the last four months and is the sole reason for the SP collapse."
The SP had fallen from a high above 50 cents to 29 cents (closing price on 22 April) before MT resigned, so his resignation cannot be the sole reason for the falling SP.

- Your talking about 1c, What did the SP fall to after he resigned and what is the SP now?

"If he really did quit for "personal reasons", in his position as the CEO, he should have handled the announcement better than the "CEO resigns and Johns taking over" announcement that shocked the SH, crashed the SP and left the board in disarray until he miraculously gets over his "personal reasons" to come back as the triumphant hero."
I think you will find the announcement you are referring to was 'handled' by the previous BoD. Yes, the announcment was poorly managed and the resignation caused the SP to fall. As for the board being in disarray, let's remember that MT was not a member of the BoD back then. If the resignation of a key employee causes an ASX listed company's board to be in disarray then I'd say they've got some major governance issues (which I do think was the case and is a major reason for the shakeup since). MT's 'return' (he was still employed and in his notice period) only occurred post the replacment of the old BoD, which was instigated by SHs not MT.

- He was the CEO of the company at the time. This is not the secretary or the guy that gets the mail, it was the CEO. Who quit because he didn't get what he wanted. No one has released the real story to the SHs and the video released after he returned was a weak display of the truth of what happened.

"If he hadn't had his "personal reasons" (which was code for "I didn't get what I wanted so I threw a hissy fit and quit") the SP would have stayed near 40c and screamed higher after the FDA announcement. and even higher again on the Heally announcement!"
I realise that you are speaking from a position of ignorance (in the proper meaning of the word, not an insult) but I can assure you that there was no hissy fit or not getting what he wanted. I believe there were no demands made at all. Instead, as I understand it, the old BoD wanted to pursue outcomes that MT disagreed with. My assessment was that those outcomes were not in the best interests of SH, although I accept that is a judgement call. I also believe that the resignation should not have taken the then BoD by surprise.
As already mentioned, the SP closed at 29 cents the day prior to MT's resignation, so it couldn't stay near 40 cents as it was already well below that price and trending downwards.

- As the CEO you need to take direction from the board. You may not like these directions however that is your job. The BoD do not answer to the CEO, they answer to the SHs. If what you say is true, which you don't know, because nobody actually knows the truth, because it was never released, it is not right to just quit until you get what you want. MT did not take into account the SHs considerations at all at any time in doping what he did. The only person he thought about was himself and his legion of fans on Hotcopper. If the direction of the board was to do something different to what he was hoping to achieve. these issues should have been put to the SHs to vote on a resolution. MT is not king of the castle here. He has to answer to the SHs! What if what the BoDs were actually putting forward a better direction than the almighty MT? Have you considered this? Or your blind faith in MT is all that matters like some Trumptopion world? What happens next time that the board wants to go a different direction to the almighty MT? Does he just quit again until he gets what he wants and the return all mighty again? But hey, I'm ignorant here so who knows.

"He then does a cash raise at 19.5c for a measly $18m. This cash raise should have been happening in the 30c - 50c range based off the momentum of the results and the FDA approval gaining $30m plus for the trials ahead."
I couldn't agree more - the raise should have been done in that price range and I will never understand why the old BoD didn't pull the trigger on a raise when they had the opportunity. This is a board responsibility. Once again, MT was not on the BoD then and cannot be held accountable for that failure. As for the decision to raise now at 19 cents, I'm not sure what else the current board could do. The money was needed now and IMO the raise was handled really well - the SPP in particular (same terms as instos and sophs, no freebies to placement participants, Morgans options issued at a premium).

I'm responding to you in this way because I was more closely involved in what occurred post MT's resignation and have the benefit of knowing more about what happened than most. I'm certainly not wanting to devalue your opinion and I respect that this has been a trying time for SH as the corporate goings-on have introduced an element of uncertainty and distracted from some really good news that should have moved the SP upwards. However, there are some factual inaccuracies that appear to be fuelling your and others unhappiness with our MD, which I've endeavoured to address.

- I don't need your help but you are free to write on a social platform what you like as am I.

And, of course, you can vote however you like at the AGM. I do hope, though, that your vote is informed by fact and not driven by emotion.

- I think that it will be interesting to see the number of votes against his remuneration package. At the end of the day PAA does not need MT anymore. didn't really need him to start with, there were a number of CEOs that could have easily achieved what he has achieved with the same results and most likely have a higher SP right now. If he loses his remuneration and quits in disgust, PAA will still be successful if the trials go through to be successful. The results will speak for themselves, just as they had before his arrival to the company. My almost million shares will voting NO, I'm sure the old board will also be putting down a NO to him as well.

Cheers