No, not really Rupert. I was being facetious.You probably didn't...

No, not really Rupert. I was being facetious.

You probably didn't see my previous posts where I asked some not so popular questions about The Lind Partners and their specially created ASOF fund when I exposed what the company had completely failed to tell us, ie that the Lind Partners were actually a subsiduary of Springtree. See here

Additionally I had the following thoughts on how this would play out.

Specifically I said:

"The script appears to be staggeringly blatent. Draw a time line of actual events that are coming up including:

1) Agree to a deal which includes a huge fee payable by the company (shareholders) which could be seen as a poison pill.

2) Demand more money from shareholders to keep their hopes alive.

3) Force through a reconstruction of capital that moves the rights to most of the cash just raised from the shareholders who put it in to a specific group of non-shareholders.

4) Well you can guess the rest.


The first three items have already been announced. The sequence is telling. I think this is called milking the cow for the last time before shooting it. Just remember in this version of Chess the 90% rule is Checkmate !

I have a few questions:

a) Since the deal with Springtree, sorry Lind Partners, was agreed to long before the AGM and proxy papers were prepared why is it that the resolution to issue shares to ASOF made it into the AGM as a resolution but the other clauses included in the agreement must wait for a special subsequent meeting ? Why couldn't they all be put forward in the same meeting and why are we all copping the expense of a second meeting ?

b) Why are the terms of the agreement slowly being released and why are they slowly changing to be more in favour of Springtree vs what was originally announced ? Is the agreement written down or is it just a vague verbal agreement ? If its written down why can't we see all the real terms and conditions rather than the glossy headlines which are obviously materially different to the actual agreement (as disclosed recently with the actual conditions of the debt forgiveness .... or not as the case may be)?

c) If the rights issue fails does this mean that the debt forgiveness is zero but they still get the fee ?

d) Is it complete coincidence that after an endless period of virtually no news the company suddenly becomes aware of half a dozen groups who are interested in evaluating its products ? What are the chances of such a sequence of disclosures about approaches by interested parties miraculously occuring during the days preceding the Rights Issue documentation appearing in the mail ?
"


So am I really shocked ? Hardly. Just annoyed.