Awesome post
@huffster012 . Thank you for taking the time to put together your thoughts. They certainly reflect my thoughts very closely.
With respect to "I suspect DRO will argue no raise was NEEDED but they did it opportunistically", this is an argument that I have seen put forward by other posters in support of this capital raising... and it's possible that Droneshield management would rely on that argument. I believe it's quite likely that this is the argument that was put to the board by Peloton or an influential broker or investor, on which the board has clearly acted.
It is a completely spurious and invalid argument. If there is no need for additional cash then a capital raising is a pointless, expensive, dilutive action. Doing this clearly promotes the interests of the directors and privately selected shareholders against the interests of all other shareholders. The directors are apparently abusing the Temporary Extra Placement Capacity Class Waiver under Listing Rule 18.1, intended for businesses genuinely struggling to adapt to pandemic restrictions, for personal gain and for the benefit of a select few. I strongly suspect that Droneshield are being used by Peloton and/or other brokers and financiers in a campaign to milk the temporary extra placement capacity for as much money as they possibly can.
ASIC is not the only place this behaviour can (and should) be reported. The ASX granted the waiver and enforces the behaviour of market participants. If you report this matter to the ASX, you will also not be the only one.
I have other angles too, but I intend to gather evidence before disclosing.r
(20min delay)