Ann: Notice Received Under Section 249D of the Corporations Act, page-32

I believe those that have formally lodged the 249d have a valid basis for their concern in regards to the business.

I also think that it's worth noting the decline in share price of circa 50% whilst Jack was leading the business as CEO, prior to recent events unfolding. I don't think anyone that met Jack can debate that he had a strong opinion (vision) of how to run the company and also delivered a number of milestones for the business, however the general feedback that I have received was that it had become apparent that he put a lot of people offside domestically from fund managers, brokers to investors. If we as shareholders have any hope in seeing interest return to the business on market, we need to the support of these such groups domestically.

Possibly the reason why other larger shareholders are not present on the formal 249 notice is because they may not have been happy with all of proposals put forward for formal consideration? I don't doubt that many, if not all share the same concern for the business and may be prepared to vote in favour of some (maybe all?) of the proposed.

This should not be about personal opinions of those who have lodged the 249d, if their basis for doing so is valid, all shareholders need to consider what they see as the right way forward for the business and
use their vote to act accordingly.