Ann: Annual Report to shareholders, page-9

Hi Andy,

I don't agree. I feel that the current directors have simply looked to put down the former directors for their own uprising. I am in no way disputing the fact that former directors committed wrongdoing, but I don't believe that posting side by side bio's (including current "addresses") is constructive in any way. It's a downright childish comparison.

From numerous announcements and articles in various newspapers, we all know what has previous happened with the Company. I don't know how long the current directors have been shareholders of CDB, however I am fairly certain that I have ridden this journey much longer than them.

I understand that the report covers historical events and that it is the duty of the Company to provide this information to shareholders, however the manner in which this information was presented is unprofessional and completed unnecessary in my opinion. Shareholders know what has happened in the past. This doesn't need to be reiterated.

Over. And Over. And Over. Again...

If the current directors are so professionally qualified, surely they wouldn't need to draw direct comparisons between themselves and the former directors? I respect what the current directors have achieved for shareholders as a whole and more importantly themselves, however why draw the comparison between current and former directors? Shouldn't they be incomparable, if the current directors are so above for former ones? Wouldn't a better comparison be between the Current CDB directors and other directors of leading ASX listed companies!? Would this not be a better way to demonstrate the capabilities of the current board.

Also, you state that "If cdb won 2 mil it would over double the current market cap with no dilution.". Of course it would. $2M cash added to the current market capitalisation would significant increase the overall MC.

But you need to ask the question, where is this $2M going to come from? Damages have to come from former directors, that is, if found guilty. However, how much will this cost in legal fees for CDB before they see a return? Surely the limited budget from ASIC isn't going to front up the costs for CDB to recover damages from the former directors to have allegedly committed wrongdoing? Also, even if it was successfully, do you really believe that the former directors are holding assets to pay the cost of these damages? Do you really think that the former directors have a cheeky $2M ready to pay up to CDB IF they were successful?

Look, it's a great story to think that CDB is suddenly going to be instantly recapitalised by litigating former director for damages from corporate wrongdoing, however it SIMPLY IS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN!

In my opinion, the fact that the current directors of CDB are pursing former directors for damages indicates a certain misunderstanding of the market and ASX listed companies in general. Despite the somewhat biased comparisons between Directors (current and former) in the Report, one thing to note is that from what I have read, the current directors have no experience in ASX listed companies or any listed companies for that fact. Other than Jay Stephenson who has experience as a Company Secretary of a number of companies, the other directors have spent no time in this space.

For one, as an investor, I understand that running an ASX listed company requires specialist experience and knowledge which I simply don't believe the current directors have. To think that a capital raising strategy can revolve around chasing former directors as an attempt to recapitalise a company is completely foolish in my opinion. Not to mention the fact, that that post takeover, they have inadvertently presented themselves in such a foolish manner by wholeheartedly pursing this as a genuine strategy.

The victory laps, claims to fame, victorious moment, director comparisons and general childish commentary needs to end.

For one, I want to see some action with this Company. Articles in the Australia nor childish reports are going to build a successful Company, so its time to get past this and make some progress.

Solutions not problems (and definitely not pie in the sky strategies)

NB: "Sentiment" and "Position" may be different if the shares were tradable.

My opinion only.

- DYOR