Just to be crystal clear, I think getting Keysight Technologies...

Just to be crystal clear, I think getting Keysight Technologies onto EMVision's share register is an unmitigated achievement by Scott Kirkland and the team. I think it is a very positive step in what seems to be a very positive journey and I wish the EMVision team and us shareholders every success.

But I do detect a level of unbridled optimism on the back of this transaction from some posting on these threads. The reality is that the company still faces a number of significant risks in the pre-revenue phases: trial outcomes and regulatory assessments being a couple of biggies.

I do think it important to underline that talk by experienced investors on the EMV threads about CSL or Pro Medicus is to highlight the best case opportunities for EMVision. Inexperienced investors should not mistake that talk to be about the most likely outcome. Here is an example of a big player taking a strategic holding in an up-and-coming medtech firm. In November 2022 one of the world's biggest pathology labs, Sonic Healthcare, sunk $18m into Microba for a 19.9% stake. The MAP share price shot up in response by 55% from about 28 cents a pop. But since then things have not gone brilliantly for Microba and the share price is down significantly, to about 17.5 cents a pop last week.

The vote of confidence from Sonic Healthcare in Microba was indeed a good thing, just as the vote of confidence by Keysight in EMVision is a good thing. But in both cases there are still a ways to go and neither may end up being the next CSL or the next Pro Medicus.

As always, people who do not have a solid grasp of the risks in investing on listed juniors should seek independent expert advice and should be wary of investing more than they can afford to lose. The level of discussion on the EMVision hc threads is relatively high, with a number of really smart and generous contributors here. Just don't misunderstand the context of their discussions.


This MAP chart covers about the last 18 months and is snipped from a ASX chart

Gareth - my understanding is that a holding of less than 10% in itself is not enough to block a take-over. As long as the predator can get at least 90% of the prey's shares then they can effect a compulsory acquisition of all the remaining shares. In the example I gave above, by holding more than 10% of MAP shares but less than 20% Sonic effectively controls the corporate future of Microba. By holding around 9% of EMV Keysight will have a say in EMVision's future but not control. (ordinary resolutions require 50% and special resolutions require 75%, schemes of arrangement for buy-outs require 50% of voting shareholders and 75% of voting shares). However the killer point here is that insiders of the company already hold about 20% of the share registry and mum and dad investors hold about 60%. This combination makes it very hard for a predator to mount a sneak attack on EMVision in my opinion.

By raising $15m with a small discount now takes a lot of share price pressure off the company. From all reports it has been almost impossible for junior ASX companies to raise capital in the last 12-18 months and even then what seems to be happening is that market players identify those companies needing to raise funds and use the market to drive the share price down on expectation of buying blocks of discounted shares in the cap raising (or maybe it is simply the invisible hand of the market). The alternative is for them to buy on market which would put upward pressure on the share price before they could build a block holding. The $15m will be well used by EMVision and this will be without the company feeling funding pressure on the share price.