@red-frog, I understand your frustration—many of us are feeling...

@red-frog, I understand your frustration—many of us are feeling the same way. It’s deeply disappointing to see how this situation has evolved, and it’s hard not to feel betrayed when long-term shareholders like yourself are left with what feels like crumbs. However, I think it’s important to clarify a few things and take a step back before finalising how we vote.

Firstly, voting against every resolution may feel like a way to protest the unfairness, but it’s worth considering the consequences. If the company goes into administration - which is a real possibility if none of these proposals are approved - shareholders won’t just lose more value; we’ll lose everything. Tax losses can’t even be claimed in this scenario, and any residual value will likely be wiped out entirely. It’s one thing to vote against a resolution on principle, but cutting off our nose to spite our face isn’t a logical way forward.

Second, I share your frustration about dilution and the issuance of shares at $0.015 to new parties. But at the same time, there’s still a sliver of opportunity here. These resolutions, while far from ideal, do inject capital into the business and keep the company alive. If SMG can position itself to leverage silver’s potential upside, there’s at least a chance for some recovery. It’s not great, but it’s something. Total administration means zero chance.

Finally, on the notion that this is a “done deal”—yes, it’s very likely that the resolutions will pass. However, shareholder participation sends a strong signal. Voting selectively, rather than indiscriminately, allows us to maintain a voice in this process. Rejecting the most egregious resolutions, while supporting those that keep the company solvent, is a more pragmatic approach.

It’s painful, but we need to approach this strategically. Protecting what’s left and giving the company a lifeline, even if we’re critical of management’s actions, is better than outright destruction. I urge you to reconsider a blanket “No” vote and focus on what can still be salvaged.