JRI IVZ Fireside Chat - March 26, page-124

I agree with your points. However, just to play devil's advocate, one potential reason for the board to hold off on taking up the rights issue is to strengthen their ability to sell the shortfall to other investors. If I were being pitched a capital raise, I would be more likely to participate if the management and directors were participating in the capital raise at the same time as me. If they had only participated in the RI, it raises the question of whether anything has changed in the interim that would cause the management/BOD to no longer participate. Maybe ideally management would participate in both, but personally I would like management putting in as much money alongside me as possible.

Another, more unlikely scenario is that they had lined up investors to take up the shortfall and wanted to get as many shares as possible into their hands (assuming they are large/institutional Zimbabwean investors). The more local investors with a stake in Invictus, the less likely government will interfere imo. In this scenario, management/directors would only pick up any leftovers.

I don't necessarily think either of the above was their reasoning, just trying to think of potential explanations that are positive.