A couple of observations on David Willis's letter - He doesn't...

A couple of observations on David Willis's letter - He doesn't state that he has an interest as a shareholder, and if he isn't a shareholder (which I believe is the case) he doesn't declare his interest or who he represents directly via his financial advisory service. I really do hope that the Hayne Royal Commission's ambit extended so we some tightening around this somewhat deceptive behaviour. I also struggle to see how the adoption of David Willis's suggested "strategy" provides any certainty vis-a-vis future funding for Kasbah. The next phase of Kasbah's progression to delivery needs to be funded such that its DFS becomes bankable and supported by financiers. Shareholder approval of the convertible loan provides Kasbah up to $1m cash to continue the business to that end, and therefore it makes clear sense for shareholders to vote “for” the resolution. When reading the notice of meeting, I see that Pala says 3 times it has no intention of exercising it's option to convert the loan. The 50% ownership that David Willis postulates is in my opinion extremely unlikely given Pala's publicly stated undertakings, and it would require Pala to convert immediately, sterilise the opportunity for any other equity to be raised, and cause Kasbah to defer repayment for another year. In my opinion, David Willis's letter and motivation is very questionable, and should be seen as such by mature shareholders. It strikes me as incongruous that the members of the financial advisory services are still able to make largely unsubstantiated and assumptive attacks of this kind, and that the directors are not suing him for deformation. Again, if he isn't a shareholder and he hasn't declared his interest or who he represents directly via his financial advisory service, what is he other than an ill informed agitator. I most certainly wouldn't be voting as he requests, or you WILL see your investment disappear.