As best as I can work out (and its one of the most complicated...

As best as I can work out (and its one of the most complicated funding agreements I've seen) CHM needs to issue:

103,333,333 shares and 41,891,892 options (4.8c exercise, 4-year expiry) for $3.007m (ie $3.1m less the $93,000 commitment fee).

Putting the options into a Black Scholes calculator, I got an option value of 0.5c per option - ie approx $210,000.

So including the option value in the calculation means that CHM is issuing 103,333,333 shares for $2,797,000 - ie the shares are being issued at about 2.7c each.

Ok, desperate times call for desperate measures, so I can understand that management had no option (other than the crazy idea of perhaps taking a significant pay cut for the next 6 months) but to do this type of funding deal in the hope that it carries CHM through to meaningful trial results.

The bit I don't get is why take the risk with the obvious lack of disclosure of a material arrangement?

Some shareholders will feel aggrieved that they were not aware of the Lind arrangement prior to the SPP closing, because if they had known there was additional funding, they may have taken up the SPP.

Some shareholders will feel aggrieved that they took up the SPP at 3.5c / share, when Lind gets to invest at the same time at about 2.7cps.

Either way, there is no doubt that it was a material arrangement about which shareholders should have been made aware. Given the 20-day VWAP calculation in the announcement, it sounds like the negotiations with Lind commenced before the SPP was even announced. Doesn't the lack of transparency expose management?

The same is the case with the L1 facility. Its on a 4C, its off a 4C, then its only officially terminated (with the lazy issue of another 1.8m shares (for what?)) last week. It was a $30m facility - how can a lack of transparency about its usability or existence be justified?

Leaving aside the ongoing precarious financial situation, management seem to be creating a bunch of non-disclosure landmines that expose them at CHM and probably counts against those that also manage other companies in the Hoppers-phere ...