Jantimont I just want to focus on one key area of difference. On...

Jantimont

I just want to focus on one key area of difference.

On 29 October 2013 AYN announced as a result of the "Investor Presentation October 2013” they “repaid A$3.6 million debt" from the raised $7.4m.
They didn’t say “repaid $A3.6 million of the debt” or “part repaid debt A$3.6 million”.
It was clear from what they said at the meeting and what they said in print, the total remaining debt ($3.6m), and was to be paid off from share issue as first priority, and then the debt was actually paid off (or so they claimed in print on 29 Oct 2013).
There was also much relief after the Sydney meeting, as $3.6m debt was to be repaid from imminent share issue.
Anyone who also went to Sydney or any other city Presentations, I’d be keen to know what you thought afterwards with regards to debt repayment.

Jantimont, are you saying that directors were not truthful in the above announcement? That is a big call to make, since a big discrepancy in debts.

Is it not possible they could have reduced $19m debt in June 2013, to $3.6m debt by end of October, and then paid off that $3.6m debt?
-Wasn't silver around $22/oz around then, or even more because they did their October projections based on ~$24/oz?
So July/Aug/Sep may have been profits made at higher silver prices.
-There was also Notion vtec who on 17 Oct 2013 announced it had paid $4.875m for 975m shares (payment could have happened earlier). Also if Notion vtec had known about a $19m debt, they would be less likely to invest than if debt was $3.6m. Maybe someone should ask them – we have their email address, [email protected]
-Directors could also have made private placements to reduce debt.
That being the case they could have reduced debt from $19m to $3.6m.

sid