To paraphrase the cliche, it is difficult to get a man to...

To paraphrase the cliche, it is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his investment depends on his not understanding it...

It's a loan, a liability, it needs to be repaid (redeemed) in cash not bananas, that's the basic premise of a loan note (thus doesn;t need detailed definition and explanation in an ASX release).

Focus carefully on what HAS themselves calls the notes... "redeemable exchangeable notes".. these two terms have specific meaning and clearly define the nature of the notes.

redeemable... In finance, redemption refers to the repayment of any fixed-income security at or before the asset's maturity date. HAS notes are a 3 year maturity fixed income security (although with floating rate interest interest specifically), with a early redemption clause at HAS election (repayable in cash, not shares or bananas is simply what redeemable means).

exchangeable... this word describes the conversion of the loan from cash to shares as repayment, at the note holder's option. Sometimes parties to the exchangeable (convertible) note issue agree to exchange shares for cash at a fixed price (ie $5.50) and sometimes with reference to say a 30 day VWAP etc. Parties can agree to all sorts of structures, but nearly always conversion into shares instead of repayment in cash is at the election of the note holder (those who stumped up the loan cash the note issuer needed).

I hope you see how defining the $150M of notes as "redeemable exchangeable" simply and accurately conveys their design. My discussion of 'Call-Option" was to try and convey the 'equity upside kicker' embedded in the exchangeable for shares structure of the loan. I hoped readers would be familiar with call options and thus understand the attraction to Wyloo of lending money at generous rates (~12-13% pa) plus upside if HAS/NEO shares went on a tear and traded north of $5.50.

This was a really good deal for Wyloo, and a really bad one for HAS (taking on $150M debt to punt other RE stocks during a time they needed to raise $100's M for development, knowing that if the RE market fell they could/would be left in a world of debt pain). AIMHO of course, I could have this completely wrong...