Forum Topics PAR PAR Cap Raise

Pinned straw:

Straw deleted
Karmast
Added one year ago

The discount was excessive as the funds were always going to come from mostly existing shareholders that are already "bought in". They would have preferred less dilution of course. And the best evidence was the institutional raise was over subscribed by 15%. This is a management team and Board that haven't got a great track record managing capital sadly.

Over the past 5 years shareholders have been diluted by more than 50%, while the Board and Management have received $12 million in salary and incentives, all funded by shareholders.

I do in tend to participate and see it through but I will be putting some hard questions to them at the upcoming AGM and voting against more dilution in the remuneration and rights plans they are proposing.

14

GazD
Added one year ago

I feel you Karmast. As a long term shareholder I feel they could have marshalled capital more carefully. Another biotech holding of mine Prescient (PTX) seem to do a much better job of looking after funds derived from cap raises and seem to be defying gravity with their careful cashburn.


That said commercialising a drug costs! Getting a drug licensed is (almost) always going to take phase 3 trials and there's not much point in doing a phase 3 trial until you have the right dose to trial etc. I also think they were right to chase disease modification status (although I'll be very disappointed if it turns out they haven't ticked the correct boxes for this).


I will probably participate too but I'm aware that this might be a stock with a long of 'sunk cost' for me and I'd love to hear from those who want to shoot this thing down.

9