Happy to make the point to Mike when we see him next (early in the new year hopefully) @Stevie_B

I know the good folk at the ASA do a lot of great work on this front too.

Honestly, even an email to the IR team can help too I reckon. Every voice counts!

"Honestly, even an email to the IR team can help too I reckon. Every voice counts!"

I agree with @Strawman. One email probably won't make a difference. But there are around 50 StrawPeople who are $SGI holders. If the IR guy gets 50 emails, he'll be sure to flag this to MIke and the CFO.

I imagine there are many more outside the Strawman community who have already written in.

Arguably, if you are not prepared to take 2 minutes to write a brief, polite email giving the company feedback, then you only have yourself to blame next time it happens.

In a typical year, I will write to Chairs, CEOs and/or IR teams probably half a dozen times or so. I don't always get a reply, but sometimes it does lead to thoughtful engagement. So, give it a go.

[email protected]

There is another way to think about it. Microcap SPs are often notoriously volatile. You might find that after waiting a few weeks or months, the market presents you with the opportunity to buy the shares at an even lower price than the raising. (I reckon there is a good chance for that with $SGI)

A recent example was $OCC, who did a discounted raise at $1.30 recently. Within a few weeks of the raise, I was able to add more in the range $0.95 to $1.15, Turns out I was lucky to have ben excluded. I know that's not the point here. But it might be a practical remedy,

In the case of $OCC, I never wrote to management to give my feedback. But I did buy the cheaper shares!

Thanks for the response @Strawman and @mikebrisy. It’ll be interesting to see what sort of response I get from IR. Not expecting much!!

Nice reminder about the email @mikebrisyI’ll send one in too. I wonder what total percentage of the company strawpeople own in real life? And whether part of the reason for lack of sellers is a longer term mindset of its holders. That is why I’m disappointed in management as I think they have benefited from a good group of “retail” holders for want of a better term.However in my mind it is a minor point. I’m not sure I personally would have added, with it being 20% of portfolio IRL, thanks to this community.

Nice one, @mikebrisy. Your call to action was exactly the nudge I needed — I’ve just fired off a short note to IR echoing these points. Hopefully if enough of us do the same it’ll register.

Great *unwashed*

To your question @Rocketrod on sophisticated investors, it's a certification you can get if you meet the ATO's required criteria which is one of the following:

1. Gross taxable income of $250k or more for your last 2 tax returns, or
2. Net Assets of $2.5m or more.

A qualified accountant needs to sign off on it (simple 1 page certificate) and it is valid for 2 years from then.

You don't have to know anything about companies, shares, money, life, reality or anything else to qualify, you just need to meet the above two requirements - so you could be in a coma!

To get access to offerings that are not "retail" friendly you will need this plus probably need to be registered with the broker/banker that is managing the deal or know someone to get access, because these deals are done quickly and quietly for obvious reasons for listed companies.

Rgs

Thanks @Tom73 , I’m actually classified as a sophisticated investor which shows you how loose the “rules” are… my question is more about who decides who’s a sophisticated investor? I’n sure it’s as simple as you suggest - being a client of the sponsoring broker.

I agree with @mikebrisy and will write to SGI on the weekend. Nothing will come of it I’m sure, but it feels good to vent.

Just sent my email to IR, thanks for the prompt @mikebrisy

@Rocketrod , no one "decides" who is a sophisticated investor, if you meet the criteria, have a qualified accountant fill in the certificate - you are a sophisticated investor for the next 2 years at which point you need to get another certificate. It's basically a self-assessment system with your accountant.

And it's a farcical waste of time. If you own a home in Sydney then you are probably a sophisticated investor.

The bad actors who want to peddle garbage know who to target: The low disclosure "sophisticated investors" who have no idea what they're doing and just get over the line by virtue of the fact they have a middle class income or own a home. I'm not suggesting this is the case with SGI, but that is what the current sophs system has created.

@UlladullaDave it’s an important piece of paper that states.

This person has enough money that we’re comfortable letting them make terrible decisions. Whilst giving the institution selling the fuzzy warm feeling of moral and legal escapism.

Couldn’t agree more, @Strawman.

I get that it’s easier not to worry about (trigger warning) retail during a cap raise, but all sorts of things are easier — e.g. throwing my rubbish out the car window. Doesn’t make it right.

Argh. Needless to say, one orange flag awarded to management for this.

Yes, mixed feelings about Stealth's cap raise.

Cons: No retail SPP. I agree @Colflan, they just should, even if they didn't need to. BTW, does anyone know roughly the additional cost of providing a retail SPP; ie, putting aside additional time and uncertainty about how much might be raised from retail investors, how much more would it have cost Stealth to offer a retail SPP?

Pros: Their timing shows good capital management. An opportunistic raise AFTER the acquisition has been able to take advantage of the share price pop, compared to raising BEFORE probably around $0.60. And this raise gives them dry powder for possible future acquisitions. Finally, nice that instos are continuing to show interest in Stealth.

Agree @Tom73, I don't think this material impacts valuation of the company. Some dilution outweighed by stronger balance sheet.

I've blown this trumpet before.....no SPP offer to long suffering shareholders/supporters when things aren't quite as rosy!!

But your CON points about SPP costs, etc @DrPete have been raised in those previous posts and I tend to agree that the whole time and cost proposition for a company the size of $SGI would be a burden and, even though I miss out on a top-up at $1/share, the offer most likely would have been massively oversubscribed and therefore the scale back would have probably offered each shareholder bugger all shares anyway.

So, whilst I would love to buy some shares at $1/each after having ridden the SGI train since buying for 22cents/each in 2023, I also do get it is likely better for the company and (maybe) shareholders as a whole that they did a closed-door raise.

I can't help but make one additional observation about the lack of an SPP. It's not just the dilution that "retail investors" get hit by. Nor is it the missed opportunity to benefit from the arbitrage of a discounted raise. There is a real cost to a capital raise. The release doesn't state whether the raise was underwritten (perhaps not given the steepish discount), which would increase the cost, but MST Financial will get paid regardless.

It will be worth looking at the half year result and seeing what the cost of the raise was. It won't be millions but it's still real money that you're paying out of your company so a select few (not you) can benefit. Bear in mind also that the external cost of an SPP is typically lower than an insto raise because the SPP portion is typically not underwritten. It's more painful for management because there's more comms, a lot more stakeholders and more work in terms of scaling back etc., but per dollar raised an SPP tends to be cheaper.

I'm not picking on Stealth particularly because they're not Robinson Crusoe, but it's a galling thing regardless.

Good point @Noddy74 and I would expect the cost to be in the millions, at least $1.2m which is 6% of the amount raise and a very normal cost, it's likely that to be higher and may have options/warrents/shares added to the base cash.