reply from ceo, page-27

Maybe the Professor sold shares previously in response to Bergen selling shares. Bergen will always make a profit when they sell, so it doesn't matter to them what the SP is. I listened to the BRR of Michael discussing the Bergen arrangement, and thought, are you kidding me? Everyone knows what those arrangements do to companies. It may have been that the big holder Michael mentioned in the email mentioned in the original post was, in fact, the Professor. Maybe people like the Professor just sell their shares when they find a company has an arrangement that makes being a shareholder untenable.

A 75% loss in 6 months is terrible. The company can blame a single shareholder for doing the damage, but seriously, if a company is robust, they could defend against such treachery. It's chicken or egg, imo- don't expect shareholders to stay, though, if your financial backer is cash converters.

As for Pato's, they only need to do some pre-work, some work at the pointy end, and some post-raising work. That's what they're paid for, and not to be a life-long friend to the company. They assist in raising capital- that's it! Maybe the share price would have been where it is now, even without this CR, as Bergen continued to sell down with impunity. Check out HTX as a great example of this. 3B's and Section 708A notices galore, and a share price to match. These "US-based investment funds" are the worst thing that has happened to the ASX, again, in my opinion.

goldenpig, if you check out the link I put in one f my posts, it leads to another email by Michael to greendayone. From my reading, Michael didn't like deals put to the company, due to them not providing enough shareholder value. Others may have a different interpretation. Beggars can't be choosers, Michael!