Ann: Ceasing to be a substantial holder from DBA , page-2

re: Ann: Ceasing to be a substantial holder f... I have been following DB's actions closely as they were a bit of a mystery to me when they bought in. I've noticed quite a few interesting things I thought I'd mention to anyone who cares to listen ;)

Anyone who can shed some light on why/what DB has done would be great, as they tend to jump in and be (as buddy coined) the 'pallbearers' of soon to be dead companies - information on their strategies would certainly help in future trades!

Reviewing DB's transaction history as listed on the Change in Substantial Holding notices issued 3/10, 5/10 and 15/11, it appears as though 1,500,000 shares are unaccounted for somehow, starting with the first notice:

First notice 3/10 - DB announces 8.51% voting power on a total of 31,241,103 shares. Schedule 1 in the same notice indicates they bought a total of 32,741,103 shares over the course of 9 transactions. Why the 1.5M share discrepancy??

Second notice 5/10 - DB announces 9.54% voting power on a total of 35,021,904 shares. Schedule 1 in the same notice indicates they bought a total of 3,780,801 shares over the course of 2 transactions, bringing their current position to 36,521,904 shares. Again, same 1.5M share discrepancy. If you take their actual position on that day as given by their transaction histories listed on the Schedule 1's, they actually had 10.02% this day.

Last notice 15/11 - DB announces they have accepted into the SOL offer, which means they had to commit ALL of their shares to the Offer. A look at their transactions in Schedule 1 again reveals there is still 1.5M shares they did not list as being sold anywhere in their transaction histories.

In addition, looking only at the transactions listed and the associated consideration paid, DB paid $121,773.18 more than it received from all the sales listed in the Schedule 1's. I find it hard to believe this is the case! Why risk close to $10M over a period of close to 3 months only to make a loss?

What makes more sense is adding in the value of those 1.5M shares. If they sold them for 26.5c then their total ROI would have been $275,726.82, or 2.91% over 81 days. That's 13.13% annualised. That's not a bad return.

So what happened here? Is there something i missed??