What a joke, these guys have to be kidding : [ATTACH] 124.8...

What a joke, these guys have to be kidding :



124.8 million at 0.005.

And you can see they changed the terms of the deal with the rounded down to the lowest A$0.001, this was not in the original terms, they have just added that in, check original terms:



No mention of rounded down to the lowest $A$0.001, so this has not been approved by shareholders

With this many shares being issued your talking a big difference, they are getting:

124 888 889 shares at 0.005, which is $624 444 , under the original terms which they need to abide by, they should be paying 0.0054, which is $674 400. So they are under paying the company and hence shareholders by $50k.

Im not surprised they want to do this its smart of Lind to buy in at all time lows, thats on shareholders for approving the worst terms I have seen, but they should be playing by the rules especially if they are getting to buy this many shares at all time lows.

Im going to email the company, I would emplore others to do the same so they can not claim they were unware.

Im Sending them this:

Dear Chimeric Therapeutics,

I am writing to bring to your immediate attention a discrepancy in the two most recent proposals to issue securities, submitted to the ASX on 12/02/2025 and 11/02/2025. Please find the attached documents for reference.
As per the announcement dated 23/06/2023 (attached), the agreed terms state that the securities are to be issued at "90% of the average of the three lowest daily VWAPs during the 20 trading days prior to the subscription."
The lowest price at which CHM has traded over the past 20 trading days is $0.006, meaning the lowest possible VWAP is also $0.006. Applying the contractual 90% formula results in a price of $0.0054 per share. However, the proposed issuance price is $0.005 per share, equating to a 17.41% discount rather than the agreed 10%.

Given that the deal with Lind is already unfavorable, providing an additional 7.41% discount beyond what was contractually agreed upon is not permissible.

Furthermore, the original term sheet contains no mention of rounding the subscription price down to the nearest $0.001; this clause was added in the latest prospectus without justification, which raises legal concerns.
This pricing discrepancy has a significant financial impact. Under the current proposal, Lind is receiving:

• 124,888,889 shares at $0.005, totaling $624,444
• Under the original agreed terms, they should be paying $0.0054 per share, totaling $674,400

This results in a shortfall of $50,000 on top of the shortfall from yesterdays proposal, effectively underpaying the company and its shareholders.

I request that this discrepancy be corrected in accordance with the original agreed terms. I appreciate your prompt attention to this matter.

Kind regards,