I wouldn't be embarrassed personally @Zancan. We all make decisions based on information and bias available to us at a given moment and no one has a proven method of exploiting hindsight yet except to clock up some experience and do better next time. I wish you the best in adding this experience so that you can, or already do better....
To all holders, if you haven't read the prospectus announcement from last night I seriously suggest you do, there's a lot of information inside which will help you to develop a view around your holdings, some observations and a call to action from me: - $21k to issue a prospectus for $60 worth of shares. Are Koh / board is still taking the easy road when it comes to managing investors funds? Why do they needed expensive lawyers to do this when Automic or someone similar probably could've at a much lesser fee?
- The $15-$25k per month in "fees" to Cannavo and Stephenson seemingly continues unabated. This is despite there being any evidence this has brought any benefit. Remember the path to survival required more expensive lawyer (Thomson Geer) so it wasnt / isnt for that. The recent raise had $80k of fees, so it wasnt / isnt that unless there is double dipping?
- Gu and Koh have taken massive haircuts on salary as has Rosen. How they ever though they could pay themselves so much is beyond me. There is a watch out here that the 2023 numbers have a caveat stating they are subject to change, who wants to bet that will be lower? I would however bet this was a condition of some who may have stumped funding so it might have a chance of remaining lower, albeit still unreasonably high.
- Per my comment above "The whole game resets and away we go with some disgruntled the only casualty." seems to be on the money with options being granted in lieu of fees and consulting bills that were only "earned" if the objective was value destruction.
- On the plus side there seems to be a few irons in the fire, lets see if these turn out to have any genuine shape. At least there's a dim light of hope for holders.
So onto my call to action, perhaps @Zancan with your 1.8m shares you may want to think about this... IMV Huang has just backed the company with loans, rejoining the board etc and if others named Huang on the registry are relatives, then he and his associations are the biggest holding. So does anyone have a email / contact address for Huang. We could have a zoom or if in Aus a face to face and outline that giving over $360k pa or more in director consultancy fees and having a CFO that may not be the best custodian of holders funds (SCU and IVQ) maybe isn't the best approach to seeing a return on his investment (and thereby ours). @Protagonist & @Bruce72 & others you can probably build on this idea. In addition: - significant reductions in guaranteed remuneration replaced with a high proportion of at risk with real KPI's around delivery - KPI's around commercial outcomes - KPI's around prudent use of investor funds - Where consultants are engaged a clear deliverable must be agreed and signed off by Huang / proxy or no fee payable.
It might be hopium but I can only see one reason why he is back on board and dishing the $150k - He wants his money back so I think this is an opportunity to steer Rosen, Gu and crew to some legitimate commercial outcomes. For disclosure my holding is minute and the above is more around seeing these people being held accountable in a positive way. Weve tried Rosen and gotten nowhere so its time to try a different approach.
Sorry for the long post and GLAH, above is opinion / thoughts so read with a grain of salt and do your own research and have fun.
SCU Price at posting:
1.3¢ Sentiment: None Disclosure: Held
(20min delay)