Ann: Response to ASX Query re Appendix 4C, page-35

I think there are some differences.

Let's just say I think PAC management rolled over on price and the percentage (price to FUM) should've been higher. I would've gone with up to +50% higher because they've just sold the crown jewels.

CGA is neither growing FUMA nor profitable, so there should be a discount to allow for future capital raisings.

I also think there are differences in the quality of revenue from FUM and FUMA, in particular funds under advice could be worth less than funds under management.

Overall a 3.3% multiple appears generous (42c = $611m FUMA * 3.3% multiple / 47.8m shares).

It also helps that they're selling down some illiquid positions (possibly due to the recent loss of an institutional mandate) and further driving underperformance across their funds over the short term. This should make it even harder to attract inflows.