The ASX responses delivered were the clearing of my complaints....

The ASX responses delivered were the clearing of my complaints.
My responses were added included as I don't think they really looked into the complaint but simply took the company's view as being correct.

I still do not think the actual Lanstead deal was correctly explained in the EGM notice which shareholders were asked to approve. This is evidenced by the amount of confusion when folks on here were trying to calculate how the cash received related to the agreement. There appears to be a deduction of $40k or so on each payment and I think this might me from taking the upfront payment as an advance of these amounts to be spread over the 18 months. I probably incorrectly described it to ASIC as a loan rather than an advance payment.

The JV deal seems a bit of a joke when it comes to the issue of milestone 3 shares, how can one say a heads of agreement is binding. Yes it resulted in a formal JV some 12 months later but that is still subject to pre-conditions that still have not been met. The milestone also required approved funding in place to produce 12,000 tonnes or so and there is no evidence that there is funding in place to produce anything almost two years after they grabbed the milestone shares.

The Graphenera deal might have given ASX something to refer to ASIC for a breach of listing rules given their response but then again maybe not.

I think I will leave it to the shareholder actgion group who appear to have some traction.

All IMO









They certainly took time to respond, I just don't think they really dug too deep.