So you don't understand a finance arrangement, and instead of...

So you don't understand a finance arrangement, and instead of asking the company directly for guidance.

Did that last year. Emailed the CEO directly. Got this response: "In accordance with ASIC and ASX requirements, we are unable to provide selective responses to shareholder queries. The Company communicates appropriate information via its periodic reporting and continuous disclosure announcements on ASX. In addition to complying with its obligations, this enables the Company to focus its resources to achieving its goals which we trust you will agree is beneficial to all shareholders."


Do you think L1 made the financial agreement after seeing the pipeline, seeing the progression plan, and understanding how this new tech worked? Has anything changed?

I don't rate financier's understanding of "how new tech works". They just negotiate free shares, free options, discounted shares, placement fees, underwriting fees, selective VWAPS and the like - and try to make investment returns that way. And yes, something has changed - the share price. Every ASX company that's gone bust had investments from sophisticated shareholders / financiers / banks etc ..., so not the best idea to rely on their due diligence in assuming nothing could go wrong.


Even if an L1 top up to double the SOI (unlikey) share holder upside potential from a new $52 million market cap and 900 million SOI is still huge.

The point that I keep making and you keep ignoring is that (AFAIK) L1 is not able to exceed 20% ownership without shareholder approval. There is no certainty around shareholder approval, so I question the validity of characterising the equity placement agreement as "available cash".


Your dilution argument is nonsense. CHM is just a few years old. Dilution will happen.

I'm aware that start-up biotechs need to raise money and if existing shareholders can't take up entitlements (or are excluded due to private placements) they will be diluted. But buying at 30c, and getting diluted due to a placement at 50c, is a bit different to buying at 30c and being diluted at 5c.


It always cracks me up when non holder posters think its ok to make up some fantasy and then protest when a holder calls them on it.

Was a holder. Stopped being due to (1) the company's refusal to be transparent when I asked about the mechanics of the equity placement agreement and (2) the mismatch between the rate of cashburn and trial progress. Was a good decision, but one I should have made earlier.


Rather than making personal attacks or worrying about my shareholding etc ... why not try to address the main point I've made - which is essentially that the L1 facility shouldn't be characterised as "available cash" and if its not, there's a looming cash-crunch in the short-term?

I suspect many of the sellers from 30c down to 6c held some of the same concerns, but haven't even heard of hotcopper.