What would have been worse is if they went to raise capital...

What would have been worse is if they went to raise capital before announcing their recent contract wins in China, US and Egypt ... because it would have been done in the 30's, with a very sharp discount.

Agree 40 cents would be a par raising, anything above that would be a positive.

Debt would have been a financially cheaper option IMO, but it does come along with a whole bunch of debt covenants that need to be monitored and maintained .. which may not be ideal for a business that has not yet established a steady cash flow... breaching those covenants would be a real posibility if business does not take off as management hope... something I am sure they considered when choosing equity over debt.

Putting this raising in perspective though, in hindsight the raisings done at the merger (US$20m @0.85 cents) and post merger (US$11m by US-based institutional investors @0.85 cents in August 2018) were done at a very favourable price. So before we crucify management for this capital raising, we should probably cut them some slack, because without those raisings done at 85 cents, we'd be significantly more diluted.

@ozgem makes a good point, a cap raising was the elephant in the room and once it is done with, the path may very well be cleared for a solid run on the charts. Investors expecting a cap raise may defer buying, or sell into strength as there is always the chance a cap raising in the future would bring the price back down.

So if this is the last capital raising before FLC become financially sustainable, then the sooner it is done.. the better... with business starting to gather momentum AND sufficient cash in the bank ... IMO that barrier or hesitation stopping investors (retail and insto) from buying should be lifted.