Ann: Chairman's Address to Shareholders AGM 2016, page-2

"A few shareholders that purchased Alliance shares at higher prices wished for a higher price to be achieved upon the sale of the company’s interest which, due to dilution, had diminished from 25% to approximately 20%. There are still rumblings on social media that the asset was worth more and that the company should have fought on. I have several things to say about this.

Firstly, all directors believed that the price achieved for the settlement was fair and reasonable in the circumstances.

Secondly, if the Board had not accepted that offer, it is most likely that the cash calls would have continued and we would have been forced to dilute further. It is my belief that, ultimately, our company could have run out of money and been forced into administration or worse, liquidation, as I believe that while the litigation continued it would not have been able to raise funds to fight on.
In that case, there would be no 12c return, no 2c return, no flagship project and no future."

........................................................
As a Shareholder throughout the 4m saga I just read through the Chairman's address and his reply to the "rumblings on social media"

Well imo he would have been better served to not address anything because he and the fellow Directors still haven't told the Shareholders the reasons for the Litigation and the subsequent position that Alliance Resources was placed in after the 60c Capital Raise (45m+ in funds),

that is ending in

The Dilutive Process and/or possible liquidation.

I would have let sleeping dogs lie but I read on and thought it was a joke that he could argue this

"I would now like to move on to where we are and where we are going. We have recently welcomed on board a number of savvy funds that identified the disconnect between cash held by the company and its market cap. These funds are smart operators who recognise opportunity as they step in to look after their own shareholders. Assuming the resolution is passed today, they, as Alliance shareholders, will be receiving the benefit of that disconnect between the market cap and cash held, the 2c per share capital return"

Well, well, well imo Perhaps the Directors of AGS could have taken a leaf out of the savvy funds book and looked after their own shareholders better.

That is.... the 2c Capital return should not have gone to the new Shareholders (savvy funds).
The Shareholders who received the initial 12c should have received the following 2c as well. It would be on record. imo


I welcomed the attempt of an explanation by the new Chairman to put some light on the imo shortcomings of the Litigation and subsequent poor ending to the saga  ........but it wasn't addressed or perhaps I'm not savvy enough to understand the Chairman's  reasonings ...... lol

Good Luck all

Md