I largely disagree with most of that. With respect.I should add...

I largely disagree with most of that. With respect.

I should add that I spent several years deeply involved in arranging such placements inside a broking house.....

Also, the Underwriter was entitled to receive by way of fees and expenses:
* A Lead Manager Fee of $60,000 for its services in managing the issue.
* A selling fee of 6% of the total gross amount placed or sold over and above the Underwritten Amount.
* 78,571,429 options on the same terms and conditions as the Attaching Options (Underwriter Options) in accordance with the discretion and instructions of the Underwriter.

Sure, Patersons (or more correctly, the sub Us) got stuck with a shortfall of 93m shares at a cost of $650k. Also landed 47m free options.

How much of that shortfall was sub-underwritten to retail clients is anyone's guess - but the lion's share no doubt, likely 100% - that's called minimising risk.

Re sales in PAXO, on 15 August (the day PAXO started trading) 11m were traded (all at 0.002); on the 16th Aug, 44m traded (42m at 0.001 - wow) - so there's the entire sub underwriters' allotment gone (and some)! Lucky buyers!!

Noting 16m were also traded on 31 August and 25m options went through yesterday.

Similarly in the heads = on 15 Aug, 6m (most at 6) traded, then 10m on the 16th (mostly at 5) and 14m (most at 0.006) on the 21st and another 6m (at 6) on the 22nd, 4m on the 23rd (at 6), 5m (at 5) on the 31st and 9m (at 5) on 5 Sept (I've only included the 'biggish' days). All up in those trading days - 54M.

Thereafter a handful of 2m ish days and a few days like yesterday of 5m + - say another 40m.

There's your 93m sub U overhang sold out & wrapped up?

Pretty much all got their money back or made a very small turn.

I presume these are the shares/options that could be pushed into the market at 0.005 and 0.006+ (with sales in the options at any price 0.001 and 0.002) - to recoup their money.

On the above analysis, I'd say any overhang is all but gone. No need for any capping to occur now. Those who want out are out.

There is also little doubt Patersons would be acutely aware of the potential uplift in the PAX share price upon PPA execution and subsequent lock in of funding (the exact reason why most of us are here).

Most likely there are some clients holding out for a bigger payout - prepared to wait for the news depending on the size of their position and their view on PAX's fortunes.....the sub underwriting would have been well spread through the retail client base. Doubtful imo, that any one retail client would have taken up a big position (say even $50k +).

Shareholders who took up the offer (only 63m shares + options) you would expect to be loyal holders and very aware of imminent news - and I mean imminent - unlikely to be short term sellers.

Finally imo, PT Bakrie need the technical expertise of PAX a s much as PAX needs the clout of Bakrie - can't see any shenanigans in the short/medium term when so much is at stake and so much is under the scrutiny of the press and government in Indonesia - I'm sure DT88 has a view here!

I reckon we're ready to start dancing pretty darn soon - as long as someone plugs in the jutebox (with a geothermal power source) and signs off on a good song (the PPAs).