Hi equityinvestor! I can only answer your question in general...

Hi equityinvestor!

I can only answer your question in general terms, as I am not an expert in any way on corporate finance. Dunno knows a lot more than me and his comments on the matter look totally credible to me.

I am aware of the 'death cycle' attributes of CN's - I think mentioned by Arthur A - when they are used in some situations (e.g. 'lifestyle' companies) to artificially drive down share prices to maximise conversion value (and therefore dilution).

But this is not a 'lifestyle' company. It is on the cusp of finalising some very promising trials with the promise of broader roll outs at a time when the coffers a low. So it needed a raise. I have no doubt that RW (or DG with his large 'skin in the game') would not adopt a strategy that was not in the best interests of shareholders.

I am therefore assuming that given the short timelines to potential roll out (i.e. 6 months) and the small amount deemed to be required. that the management believed that a CN was at least as good as any alternative in the circumstances.

Time will tell, but that's the way I see it at the moment.