Ann: Secondary Trading Notice, page-25

"At the conclusion of the CPA term, the Company may elect to buy-back the collateral sharesand cancel those shares for no consideration to Acuity."

I think many are confused with this statement.

May Elect to Buy-Back......Note, the word "May", that suggest the company has an option.

The second part is "Buy-back": now, why didn't the company just state "those 20 M shares are to be returned to company and then it is cancelled?"

The third point I want to make is that sentence has two parts : one is the "Buy-back" and the second is the "Cancellation".

Note, cancellation for No consideration does not mean Buy-back for No consideration.

Now, even if you did not follow any of the above, read this statement from the above press release:

"Resonance Health Limited (“Company”) confirms that it has issued the 20,000,000 fully paid ordinary shares at nilconsideration (Collateral Shares) to Acuity Capital Investment Management Pty Ltd (“Acuity Capital”) pursuant tothe Controlled Placement Agreement (CPA) with Acuity Capital (see ASX announcement dated 30 April 2019)."

Note, it states: Issued 20M shares to Acuity Capital Investment Mgt Pty Ltd for NIL Consideration.

Two points to note; it was NOT issued to a bare trust, whereby Acuity Capital act as custodian, rather it was issued to Acuity, which raises the second point; Acuity will have to pay tax on this gain (they got them for nil consideration).

So why would they (Acuity) hand it back to the company for nil consideration after 2 years?

If it was structured the way many have suggested here, it would have been issued to a bare trust whereby Acuity Capital act as custodian ONLY.