IMU (ASX) Ann: Results of Meeting Percentages

Originally posted by fourdollars: ↑

Been pondering this one. Its such a strange outcome.

The speculation on this site about a potential conflict of interest / impediment to BP deal in having Axel on the Board has no credibility. At the end of the day, our Directors unanimously recommended that shareholders vote in favour of Axel's re-election, and we have to believe that they would be across an issue as important as IMU's attractiveness to BP.

I also think that speculation that it was the "3 strategic, cornerstone investors" that voted him off is wide of the mark. They were awarded what turned out to be half-price shares by Hopper just a few months ago. Find it hard to believe that they would turn around and bite the hand that feeds them at the first opportunity.

So was the vote against Axel specifically or was it against the Board (read Hopper, since its decisions are basically his)?

I'm leaning to the latter. Axel is clearly a valuable scientific resource, well-connected in the industry and seems like he would provide well-reasoned counsel. Why would there be a protest vote against Hopper? There are a few reasons (needless to say, none of which will be supported by the fan club, but I'm speculating on behalf of the 1.056 billion votes that don't post here):

1. the award of 94m shares to Hopper after missing the FDA deadline. I know, what's in 24 hours? The thing is that the milestone for which he was rewarded is just a step along the path. All subsequent milestones will be missed, and this is potentially the irritation to shareholders (not the 24 hours). Its a bit like rewarding someone for getting to their connecting flight 10 minutes late. The 10 mins isn't a big deal, but missing the connecting flight is.

2. The award of discounted shares to the unnamed investors.

3. Disappointment with the path being taken with HER-Vaxx (ie launching 3-4 additional trials, 8 years after purchasing the technology), none of which are registrational at this stage.

4. Disappointment with the Merck / Pfizer deal. The recent ROTH report notes the following: "the trial is randomised for the presence or absence of BAVENCIO rather than HER-Vaxx, and therefore will draw more of a conclusion about BAVENCIO's added benefit than HER-Vaxx's added benefit." Maybe some shareholders believe IMU has been out-strategised ... Is IMU effectively paying millions for a clinical trial of BAVENCIO and all Merck / Pfizer have had to do is chip in a few hundred thousand dollars worth of product (the $4m is malarky, we all know that the gross margin on these drugs is north of 80%).

All speculation.

I also wondered why (if it was a protest against the Board rather than Axel) the protesting shareholders didn't vote down the remuneration report (although there were quite a few votes cast against it). But the reality is that voting down a remuneration report is symbolic. Voting off a director shows proper intent.

I reckon the Board (Hopper) knew it was coming. The highly-polished newsletter released just one business day after the AGM, already had Axel removed from the list of Directors. They knew it was coming, but too late to mount an initiative to garner shareholder support for Axel. They only needed 200m of the 4 billion uncast votes to retain Axel, but didn't send any correspondence in this regard. Very unusual. When a Board that supports a director gets wind of a potential coup, they usually send correspondence to all shareholders explaining that they "understand some destabilising elements are at play" and outline the reasons shareholders should support the incumbent.

There's no doubt that the protesting shareholders had previously approached the Board with its concerns. Its not in their interests to embarrass the IMU Board and create uncertainty for existing and potential investors.

Is there a reason the remaining directors can't issue some sort of statement? After all, their recommendation has been ignored. Something along the lines of "we understand that some shareholders had concerns with Axel / a company direction etc ... and this has manifested in a vote against his re-election. We want to assure shareholders that the direction we are taking is in the best interests of the company for these reasons xxxxx."

Expand

@4$

1. the award of 94m shares to Hopper after missing the FDA deadline.
The resolution on this 94m shares to PH was 98.8% passed in the EGM on 07/09/2021. Your imagination of voting against the board including PH is clearly out of the mark by far.

2. The award of discounted shares to the unnamed investors.
Isn't it very normal for all the companies that having the CR?? Do you know all the names that holds <5% during the CR for other companies that you invested in?
With respect to the discounted shares, in fact as the retail investors like you and me, we had a better deal when the price dropped below $30c during the CR. Did you take the offer that company award you? or you simply sold it for a penny CR profit?

3. Disappointment with the path being taken with HER-Vaxx
Merck/Pfizer was excited to explore the potentials on Hervaxx but you are the one get disappointed?

4. Disappointment with the Merck / Pfizer deal.The recent ROTH report notes the following:...............
As you were referring to the Roth report which they literally increased the PT from $0.62 to $0.71 just for this Merck/Pfizer deal. I guess you were just disappointed with their PH being $0.71 not a $1.00

Last question - what price you are waiting for to buy IMU back? Welcome to you in advance.

No.	Vol.	Price($)
13	1917207	5.6¢

No.

Vol.

Price($)

1917207

5.6¢

Price($)	Vol.	No.
5.8¢	653942	7

Price($)

Vol.

No.

5.8¢

653942

No.	Vol.	Price($)
13	1917207	0.056
14	3386705	0.055
25	3644629	0.054
15	2901167	0.053
19	1811203	0.052

No.

Vol.

Price($)

1917207

0.056

3386705

0.055

3644629

0.054

2901167

0.053

1811203

0.052

Price($)	Vol.	No.
0.058	653942	7
0.059	3329802	11
0.060	1565197	16
0.061	2979688	13
0.062	332268	4

Price($)

Vol.

No.

0.058

653942

0.059

3329802

0.060

1565197

0.061

2979688

0.062

332268

(20min delay)
Last 5.7¢		Change 0.000(0.00%)		Mkt cap ! $417.2M

Open	High	Low	Value	Volume
5.7¢	5.8¢	5.6¢	$1.040M	18.27M

@4$1. the award of 94m shares to Hopper after missing the FDA...

Peregrine extends high-grade gold shoot, sniffs anomalism at WA's Tin Can

Polarx discovers thick sulphide mineralisation at Alaskan Cu project

ASX200 dives as inflation clocks in at 4% – higher than 3.8% consensus

Sun Silver gets that drill to thrill feeling from high grade hits at Maverick Spring

Ironbark eyes lithium and niobium opportunities with 7 new Brazilian projects

Featured News

Buyers (Bids)

Sellers (Offers)

Featured News

@4$1. the award of 94m shares to Hopper after missing the FDA...

Top Stories

Peregrine extends high-grade gold shoot, sniffs anomalism at WA's Tin Can

Polarx discovers thick sulphide mineralisation at Alaskan Cu project

ASX200 dives as inflation clocks in at 4% – higher than 3.8% consensus

Sun Silver gets that drill to thrill feeling from high grade hits at Maverick Spring

Ironbark eyes lithium and niobium opportunities with 7 new Brazilian projects

Featured News

Buyers (Bids)

Sellers (Offers)

Featured News