Ann: Unmarketable Parcel Share Sale Facility, page-24

I am puzzled about some of the discussion on this thread. It seems clear to me that the primary objective is to clean up the share register with an offer to sell "unmarketable" parcels -i.e those of less than $500 in value (at the mentioned 1.4 cents, that is about 35,000 shares). The register has about 4350 individual shareholdings (calculated from the quoted 2480 with unmarketable quantities, representing 57% of shareholdings).

If such a shareholder wants to retain a small holding, there is the clear statement about submitting the "share retention slip". The other option is to buy more shares to take the holding over the $500 threshold. Anteo is simply following ASX-approved practice of allowing companies to clear the administrative costs associated with a tail of very small holdings, which I suspect in many cases are of little moment to those shareholders.

Te following paragraph appears clear to me:

"The Letter explains that, unless those shareholders notify the Company that they wish to retain their shares by submitting the Share Retention Slip, or they hold more than $500 worth of shares on the Sale Facility Closing Date, those shares will be sold, and the proceeds remitted to them free from brokerage and handling fees. Accordingly, if those shareholders want to retain their shares, they must return a completed Share Retention Slip, or make their own arrangements so that they hold shares with a value of at least $500 before the Facility Closing Date, or their shares will be sold."

As for the selling price, my interpretation is that it will be the VWAP in the ten trading days from 19-30 August 2019. Yet this sentence is not so clear to me: "The price received will be determined by market conditions and may be different from the market price prevailing at the time." Does this refer to the 1.4 cents as at the Record Date? I think the Record Date is used as the basis for selecting "unmarketable" parcels' shareholders, to whom letters will be written. So perhaps that sentence is simply pointing out that the VWAP may be different to 1.4 cents - as it well may be.

I don't attach any significance to the timing; I think it is just that we have a different company secretary now, and perhaps there has been some discussion about the size of the register. I support this move to reduce the overhead of supporting the share register, and saving our funds we have invested in the company. Likewise, I support the right of such parcel holders to specify that they wish to remain on the register - that shows they are still interested.

Meanwhile, I look forward to the next quarterly, due in less than two weeks. We really have had a string of encouraging news for many months now. I thought the last announcement about Collaborator #3 to be very good indeed. I think it is premature to guess who the party is, but I do have this comment: it is preferable to have a deal with a party who can supply to multiple end users such as battery makers, rather than to those end users themselves. For as I understand it, AnteoCoat is applied right near the start of the production chain. The party we may be in bed with can sell to a wide variety of end users. And so use more AnteoCoat.