On the corporate side the quarterly states referring to maturity...

On the corporate side the quarterly states referring to maturity of the Con Notes "the company was advised 3 days before..." that money was not available. Instead of this, it is better to state, the Company failed to have in place alternative funding. Then I checked the Board composition on the Company website under the Corporate tab. As of today it lists four Directors, namely, Dale Rogers, Anthony Gray, Jamie Cullen and Dennis Wilkins. It is out of date, Jamie has resigned and in the last annual report Dennis was listed as Company Secretary and not a Director, though I am unsure if this has changed..so the shop front is in disrepair..Within their profiles it states for Dale Rogers "...has experience in debt and equity raising...' for Dennis Wilkins it states in running DWCorporate Pty Ltd ..."he advises on formation of, and capital raising for emerging companies...". So it seems we have two well paid people, purportedly with skills in the area of raising funds, and the company failed to have alternative funding in place. Should shareholders feel aggrieved..damn right, are changes on the Corporate level necessary..damn right. Perhaps we need a new model for bonuses and high remuneration..."only to be paid when shareholders adjudge through evaluation of the Board by survey, that communication is at an acceptable and informative level. Also when the shop front is clean and tidy up to date and accurate, and when the Company shares remain trading for the full year, save when suspensions of a maximum of 3 days are required prior to the release of price sensitive announcements. These steps may up the performance of the board at the corporate level, leading to greater transparency and improved investor relations. The current model the Company operates under (if it has a model at all) is a dismal failure.