Asset-Backed Lending: A Smarter Alternative to Further Dilution, page-8

I appreciate your perspective, but let me clarify a few points:

• Representation: You're correct that only a small percentage of retail investors actively participate on HotCopper or similar platforms. However, whether it's 2% or 20%, shareholder rights and transparency concerns apply equally, and the goal is to ensure all shareholders are informed and fairly represented.

• Asset Valuation: The valuation of up to $70 million isn't arbitrary. It's based on detailed analysis of the intellectual property and patents held by FBR. The absence of a public buyout offer does not inherently diminish the underlying value—companies frequently hold valuable IP that isn't immediately purchased, yet still offers strategic options like asset-backed financing, licensing, or partnerships.

• Commercial Viability: Regarding commercial viability, I agree—having a signed offtake agreement would significantly strengthen FBR’s market position. My point is precisely that alternative financing solutions could help the company reach that critical milestone without excessive shareholder dilution.

• Activism Concerns: Whether someone owns 20 million shares or 20 thousand, shareholder activism is not about personal gain but about corporate accountability and fair governance. Every shareholder, irrespective of size, deserves proper disclosure and representation in decisions that materially impact their investment.

Finally, regarding past EGMs and AGMs, history may indicate outcomes, but shareholders always have the right to advocate for transparency and better corporate governance. That's precisely what this effort seeks to accomplish—nothing more, nothing less.

Thanks for engaging constructively.