The company has announced that the first $500 will be accepted with oversubscriptions scaled back pro rata (as I suggested).
We can't know for sure how it plays out because we don't know which segment has applied for what. I do note that the largest 20 shareholders in the annual report own 58.3% - lets assume the top 100 own 80% of the company, when they apply they will receive their full $1,500,000 application.
Conversely at the small end of town 10,863 shareholders have less than 5,000 shares each let's assume they all apply and receive the minimum 1000 new shares ($5,431,000).
All these shareholders should be happy as they have increased or maintained their proportional interest in the business, the little guys have been favoured as stated in the announcement.
That brings us up to $7 million.
What of the remaining 6,706 representing say 18% of the company - we have been diluted by the raising some 17%. To maintain our proportional holding would require 16 million new shares or $8m of the $3m remaining so there's no guarantee we will. We can hope for quite minimal dilution though off these rough numbers, at the expense of the top 100.
Contrast this with my recent position in Tower insurance, it's capital raising was fully underwritten (at a cost of $5m) however it's position was much more serious. 88% of entitlements taken up with 12% for the underwriter (who provided a useful (if expensive) service as an essential backstop).
Rights could be sold on market allowing those who needed cash to realise some value.
https://hotcopper.com.au/threads/an...-offer.3911804/?post_id=29647421#.WjOErcuYbqA
If the capital raising had failed there was a capital adequacy risk at TWR which certainly did not exist for AWE, even in a tough spot Tower acted more fairly than the AWE dog.
If I am correct with my speculation then I will be getting around $5,000 of new shares and a $10,000 cheque back in the mail - in both TWR and AWE the outcome is equivalent to me. I just think Tower gave everyone a chance which is the job of a good company director.
The moral of this story is that if you own 3% of a company you should know the directors on a first name basis, talk about how smart their kids are and have them on your Xmas card list. If they are going to raise capital then put your hand up early fot the opportunity to participate pro rata.
Don't do the "Dawney" - threaten to sack them without having the numbers behind you and just waste their time while making joke takeover offers to write a free option for 20% of the company.
GLTA
