Shares

Chronological list of Covid-19 capital raisings


October 18, 2020

Here is a reverse chronological list (based on retail closing date) of capital raisings above $20m announced in 2020 after the Covid-19 crisis hit, including ratings out of 10 for completed offers. There were 88 deals up until the Spirit Telecom offer was announced.

November 6: Kina Bank (KSL): the PNG-based bank raised $91 million, comprising a $70 million 1-for-2 non-renounceable at 80c, a $10.5 million placement and a $10.5 million PNG SPP for retail holders. The institutional component of the pro-rata offer raised $35 million with the retail offer to follow.

November 6, 2020: Dubber (DUB): completed a $35 million placement at $1.10, a 12% discount to the previous close of $1.25, with a $6 million SPP to follow. No VWAP alternative pricing offer if the stock falls.

October 27, 2020: Starpharma (SPL): Completed a $45 million placement at $1.50, a 6.5% discount to the previous close of $1.605, and then proceeded with an online only $5 million SPP. It would be preferable if a paper version of the SPP offer document was mailed to all shareholders. The SPP is unfairly capped at $5 million and the directors were reserving the right to close it early.

October 22, 2020: Select Harvests (SHV): a $120 million raising to fund a $129 million almond acquisition in regional Victoria, comprising a $40 million placement at $5.20 and a 1-for-6.3 non-renounceable entitlement offer at $5.20. The pricing was a tight 4.8% discount to the previous close of $5.46 and the company claimed to have 99% participation in the $41.5 million institutional component of the pro-rata offer. The $38.3 million retail offer includes an ability to apply for additional shares equivalent to 50% of entitlement.

October 20, Kazia Therapeutics (KZA): 1-for-3 non-renounceable entitlement offer at 80c to raise $25 million. Priced at a 16.7% discount to the previous close of 96c. The institutional component raised $16.4 million and the retail component capped overs at 100% of entitlement.

October 15, 2020: Corporate Travel (CTM): raised $375 million through a 1-for-4.03 non-renounceable entitlement offer at $13.85, a 14.3% discount to the previous close of $16.16. Funds were need to pay for a $US200 million US acquisition. Founder and CEO Jamie Pherous declined to participate and wasn't compensated for the dilution. He owns 21.27m shares so will be diluted from 19.5% to around 15%. The $262 million institutional component was 90% supported (excluding the Pherous shares) with the shortfall going to a undisclosed institutional investors. The $113 million retail offer is underway with around 17,000 retail investors permitted to apply for overs up to a maximum of 100% of entitlement. The stock soared to $17.23 when trading resumed so it looks attractive.

October 8: Charter Hall Long WALE REIT (CLW): $60 million placement at $4.87 followed by a $10 million SPP at $4.80 (the discount reflects the missed distribution) which attracted $88.4 million in applications and was expanded to $66.1 million creating the rare situation of an SPP bringing in more cash than the earlier placement. The stock was trading at around $5.20 on the issue date so participants made around $2500 if they applied for the full $30,000. The scale back methodology was a 1-for-1 model so you only received the full $30,000 allocation if you went into the offer owning $30,000 worth of shares. There was no minimum allocation like in many scale backs so if you owned 10 shares you only received 10 more shares. Reasonable disclosure on participation with 4,423 applicants who applied for an average $20,000 each.

October 7: Bubs Australia (BUB): $28.3 million placement at 80c, a 15.8% discount to the previous close of 95c, followed by a $10 million $30,000 SPP at the same price with provision to go to a maximum of $11.7 million. Was originally scheduled to close on September 23 but then extended to October 7 due to Australia Post delays. Ended up only bringing in $3.8 million from 492 applicants.

October 7: Gascoyne Resources (GCY): $85 million equity raising at 2.5c comprising a $35 million placement of 1.4 billion shares and a 2-for-1 non-renounceable entitlement offer to raise a further $50 million with "overs" limited to 50% of entitlement. The stock last traded at 3.9c on May 29 before being suspended and it still the subject of a DOCA after an earlier collapse. The record gold price is bringing back the dead as Gascoyne promises a revitalised mine plan for its existing Dalgaranga project in WA, plus aggressive pursuit of a number of exploration opportunities. The retail offer attracted $17.1 million in applications and was 71.3% subscribed with the shortfall to be dealt with ahead of trading resuming in late October after a 5 month suspension.

October 6, BCI Minerals (BCI): 1-for-2 non-renounceable offer at 24c to raise $48 million with largest shareholder Kerry Stokes taking up his full allotment. The institutional component raised $20.8 million but the the $27.2 million retail only attracted $5.5 million, leaving a $20.6 million shortfall with the under-writers. There were no overs, suggesting the under-writers were quite happy to pick up the stock. .

September 23: Huon (HUO): $60 million placement at $3 followed by a capped $4 million SPP, albeit with a 2.5% discount to VWAP. Ended up being priced at $2.92 and raising just $2 million with good disclosure of the poor participation with the ASX told that only 160 or 9% of the 1734 eligible shareholders participated, with the average application being $12,500.

September 22: Pointsbet (PBH): foreshadowed a $300 million raising on August 28 in conjunction with announcing its full year results and a major marketing deal with NBC. The stock duly soared from $7.50 to $14 on August 28 and then, after 3 days of trading, the $303 million capital raising was launched on September 2. It originally comprised a $150 million placement although this was up-sized to $200 million and priced at $11. The institutional component of the $153 million PAITREO raised $70.5 million with a 55% take up rate. The shortfall of 4.88m shares cleared at $12.50, raising $61 million and returning a hefty $6 a share or $29.3 million to non-participants. Rights trading ran from September 9 until September 15 with a value of $5.7 million and an average price of $6.48. There was a very healthy 92% take-up of the $82.7 million retail offer as $76 million came through the door. The 1.05 million retail shortfall shares cleared at $10.60, deliver $4.10 in compensation to non-participants so a win for the instos in terms compensation. A well structured offer. 7/10.

September 22: Orocobre (ORE): A $126 million placement at $2.52, which was priced at a 13% discount to the previous close of $2.90. Followed by a $30 million SPP at $2.52 or a 2% discount to VWAP. Board expanded to $43 million to avoid any scale back after 2,469 or 23% of the eligible 10,742 shareholders applied for an average of $17,000. Excellent disclosure in the outcome announcement and well done for uncapping the SPP. 6/10.

September 16: IOOF (IFL): a complicated $1.09 billion raising comprising a $432 million placement at $3.50, a 22.5% discount to the dividend-adjusted previous closed, a $588 million 1-for-2.09 non-renounceable entitlement offer and a follow-on $50m SPP, similar to the model adopted by Reece earlier this year. This is very poorly structured given the lack of renounceability, the excessive size of the placement and the bigger than average discount. The $734 million institutional component (including the placement) completed on September 2 with 92% support for the $282 million institutional component of the entitlement offer. The stock then resumed trading and tanked 21.7% to $3.58 on the first day before further declining. The $306 million entitlement offer was only supported by 3% as just 2.8 million shares were taken up for a total of $9.8 million. The $296 million shortfall went to under-writers and with the stock trading just above $3, they have dropped close to $50 million. The $50 million SPP was equally poorly supported with just $3.8 million coming through the door. There was no VWAP alternative. Retail owned 52% of IOOF before the deal launched and will be diluted down to below 40% in what has been an appallingly structured deal. 3/10.

September 15: Emeco Holdings (EHL): $149 million 1-for-2.1 non-renounceable at 85c, an 18% discount to the previous close of $1.035. There was a 94% take-up of the $111 million institutional component. Retail were banned from applying for additional shares and the $38 million retail offer only attracted $6.5 million in applications so under-writers picked up $31.5m shortfall. 4/10.

September 15: Flexigroup (FXL): $140 million 1-for-3.2 accelerated non-renounceable entitlement offer at $1.14, a 12.6% discount to the previous close of $1.305. Retail were banned from applying for overs so there will be dilution. The institutional component raised $79 million with strong participation but the $61 million retail offer was poorly supported only attracting $3 million in applications given the stock was hovering around $1. The retail offer was 50% under-written by Citi so the company said it received $36 million from the retail offer with $33 million of this coming institutional under-writers. Founder Andrew Abercrombie took up 25% of his entitlement and wasn't compensated for the dilution.

September 15: Spirit Telecom (STI):
$18.2 million placement at 32c to help fund 3 acquisitions followed by a $5 million SPP with no VWAP pricing alternative. Was flooded with $16.7 million in applications and board refunded $11.7 million sticking with the original $5 million cap but scaled back based on size of application rather than size of holding. 4/10

September 14: De Grey Mining (DEG): $100 million placement at $1.20, a 16.4% discount to the previous close, with no SPP offered for retail holders. This follows an earlier $31.2 million placement at 28c on April 28 which also offered no SPP. Two separate placements with no SPP in 5 months. This is deliberate dilution of retail holders. 1/10.

September 10: Tabcorp (TAH): $600 million 1-for-11 PAITREO at $3.25, an 11.4% discount to the previous close of $3.67. Rights trading for 8 days from August 24 until September 3. Under-written by UBS with a management fee of 0.4% and an under-writing fee of 1.3% for the institutional component and 1.5% for the retail component. There was a 97% take-up of the $371 million institutional component with the shortfall clearing at $3.70, generating a 45c compensation payment for non-participants. The shares resumed trading below $3.70 suggesting non-participating instos were well compensated, initially anyway. The 170,000 retail shareholders were offered a chance to spend $231 million taking up their rights, an average spend of just $1,360 each. Only 35,000 or 20.6% did so, committing $102 million, which was a 44% take up in dollar terms. The shortfall cleared at just $3.31, generating a 6c compensation payment to non-participants. The VWAP during rights trading was 32c with 8.5 million traded or some 12% of the total. 8/10.

September 8: Coronado (CRN): A $250 million raising at 60c comprising an over-sized $145 million placement and a 2-for-11 $105 million accelerated non-renounceable which had a 95% participation rate from institutions although a corporate shareholder was diluted without compensation. The $11 million retail offer attracted $9.6 million in applications (including overs which were capped at 2 times entitlement) meaning the $1.4 million shortfall went to under-writers. The stock was at 72c when the retail offer allotted so these were tasty profits for the under-writers left on the table by retail.

September 7: Lynas (LYC): $425 million raising comprising a $212 million placement at $2.30, a 12% discount to the previous close, followed by a 1-for-7.7 non-renounceable entitlement offer at the same price with applications for additional shares limited to 50% of entitlement. There was no disclosure on the take-up rate in the $100 million institutional component of the entitlement offer. Existing holders were offered pro-rata on the placement and the offer under-written by Cannacord Genuity and Merrill Lynch. The $114 million retail offer attracted $60 million in applications from 7697 holders, which included $10 million in overs. The $54 million shortfall was given away to under-writers with no bookbuild to retail were quite badly diluted by the whole exercise, starting off with a majority stake in the company but only contributing $60 million of the $425 million raising. The stock was at $2.53 on September 16 so this was costly dilution. 4/10.

September 4: 5G Networks (5GN): $30 million placement at $1.85 with CEO Joe Demase also selling 3m shares or 15% of his stake for $5.5 million. Not sign of an SPP which is disappointing. 2/10.

September 2: Sydney Airport (SYD): $2 billion 1-for-5.15 PAITREO at $4.56, a 15.4% discount to the last trade of $5.39. A 3 day trading halt until Friday August 14 for the institutional offer. The retail component closes on September 2 and has rights trading from August 14 until August 26. UBS is sole under-writer with a 1.05% fee for the institutional component and a 1.7% fee for the retail component. Was a 93% take-up of the $1.3 billion institutional component with the $100 million shortfall clearing at $5.30, an impressive premium to the TERP which provided 74c of compensation. The $695 million retail offer went to 110,000 retail shareholders and the take-up was 62% in dollar terms or $430 million. There was excellent participation disclosure with 53,000 shareholders applying and rights trading was worth $19 million, ranging between 55c and 89c with the rights VWAP finishing at 78c. The 58.1 million shortfall shares cleared at $5.50, a 20c discount to the previous close, and this generated a 94c compensation payment to non-participants as institutions shelled out $320 million. A win for retail given the instos only received 74c and the best outcome for retail was exiting at the end rather than on market. 9/10

August 26: Perpetual (PPT): $225 million placement at $30.30, a 9.8% discount to the previous close of $33.61, followed by a $40m SPP at the placement price or a 2% discount to the 5 day VWAP leading into the closing date. Strangely, the placement represents 15.7% of issued capital so Perpetual chose to rely on the special provisions allowing placements of up to 25% against the normal limit of 15%. The placement conclusion announcement did not provide a percentage take-up but committed to pro-rata allocations on a best endeavors basis. Minimum SPP application of $1000. Ended up expanding the SPP cap to $50 million after receiving $68 million in applications. No minimum allocation. 5/10.

August 26: Pantoro (PNR) : $50 million placement at 24c, a 5.9% discount to the previous close of 25.5c, underwritten by Argonaut to advance its WA gold interests followed by a $30,000 $5 million SPP at the same price which received $7 million in applications and was scaled back to $5.5 million with no disclosure on the scale back formula or the participation rates. 5/10.

August 21: WAM Microcap (WMI): ended up raising $88 million in a bizarrely combined placement/SPP at $1.38 that raised $29.3m in the placement and $58.7m in the SPP with both scaled back despite their being no disclosure on the size of applications. 5/10.

August 20: Centuria Industrial REIT (CIP): $240m million accelerated non-renounceable 1-for-3.7 institutional entitlement offer at $3.15 followed by a $101 million retail entitlement with overs limited at 50% of entitlement, which attracted just $35 million. It should have had unlimited overs and there was no breakdown provided on the total figure for overs. Under-written by UBS and JP Morgan. 5/10

August 18: City Chic Collective (CCX): $80 million placement at $3.05, a 4.7% discount to the previous close, followed by a $10 million SPP at the same price of a 2% discount to VWAP over the final 5 days of the offer. The placement represents 13.1% of issued capital and the SPP is just 11.1% of the capital raising. Placement conclusion announcement silent on allocation policy or take-up by existing holders. Ended up accepting all $31 million in SPP applications with no scale back which was generous for retail shareholders. 7/10

August 14: Downer EDI (DOW): $400 million 1-for-5.58 non-renounceable entitlement offer at $3.75, a 12% discount to the previous close of $4.26. The $339 million institutional component was supported by 97% of holders but shortfall was given away at the offer price. The $61 million retail offer had no overs and unsurprisingly fell 49% short with the $30 million shortfall being handed away to institutional sub-underwriters. Retail investors started off owning just 15.25% of the company and were diluted by the $30 million shortfall because they were banned from applying for additional shares in an in-the-money offer. A month later the stock at $4.23 so this was serious dilution. 2/10

August 12: Cann Group (CAN): after a $14.3 million placement at 40c, launched a $10m SPP at the same price but ended up accepting all $25.6 million in applications bringing the total raising to $40.2 million and being a rare example (see list) of an SPP being larger than the earlier placement. The SPP participation disclosure was good with 2,793 applicants, comprising 14.5% of the nearly 20,000 shareholders. 6/10

August 11: Audinate (AD8): $40m raising comprising a $28m placement at $5.15, a 9.5% discount to the previous close, and then a $12m SPP at the same price or a 2% discount to VWAP. The placement comprises 8% of issued capital and the SPP is 30% of the raising, which is above average. Under-written by UBS and Canaccord Genuity and placement conclusion announcement commented on "best endeavors" commitment to pro-rata allocation for existing holders. $12 million SPP was fully subscribed despite marginal pricing but there was no disclosure of the total applications or the participation data in the SPP outcome announcement. All we know is that applicants with less than 50 shares received nothing and everyone else got 61% of their existing holding. 6/10.

August 7: Stavely Minerals (SVY): raised $25 million in a placement at 60c, a 14.2% discount to the 5 day VWAP of 70c, with a $3m SPP to follow in order to advance its gold project in Western Victoria. Two insiders collectively sold down 2m of their 15m shares into the placement which was large relative to the existing share base such that part of it was subject to shareholder approval. The SPP had no VWAP pricing alternative and applicants were unfairly capped at $12,000 with a minimum application of $3000. The SPP raised $2.8 million with no disclosure of participation rates. 6/10

August 7: Bellevue Gold (BGL): Announced a $100m placement at the fixed price of $1, a 10.7% discount to the last close of $1.12, to be followed by a $20 million SPP at the same price with no VWAP pricing alternative. The placement outcome announcement claimed the book was covered "multiple times" and made no commitment to pro-rata allocations. Also no reference to what percentage of stock went to existing holders, which is normal in these announcements. Good participation disclosure in the SPP outcome announcement accept for the failed to reveal total applications. The $20 million cap was lifted to $35 million and the scale back policy was based on size of holding based on two thresholds: below 1000 shares got 403 shares and between 1001 shares and 29,999 shares got 78% of their application whilst everyone above 30,000 got the lot. It was a bit unfair to scale back someone with 900 shares to just a $403 allocation but apart from that, the expansion was welcome and scale back policy reasonable. 6/10

August 5: July 22: QANTAS (QAN): A $1.36 billion placement at $3.65 which represented the maximum 25% of pre-raising issued capital utilising the COVID-19 emergency provisions given that the normal placement is only 15%. The pricing was a steep 12.9% discount to the previous close or $4.19 and this was followed by a $500 million SPP on the same terms or a 2.5% discount to the 5-day VWAP. With around 93,000 eligible shareholders, the theoretical maximum in SPP allocations is $2.79 billion, so the $500m cap represents 18% of this figure which is above the average. The placement outcome announcement disclosed that 94% of the stock went to existing holders so around $80 million came from non-shareholders. The raising was under-written by JP Morgan and Macquarie for a minimum fee of 1.35% or some $18.4 million. Stock was trading below the placement price a week before the close, so the board controversially extended the July 22 closing date until August 5. Ended up raising $71.7m at $3.18 with a 5% participation rate. SPP outcome announcement adopted best practice transparency as 8,660 of the 173,343 eligible holders contributed an average $8,200 each. 6/10

August 5: BWX (BWX):
the listed hair and skincare products manufacturer announced a $40 million placement at $3.40, a 7.1% discount to the previous close of $3.66, to be followed by a $10 million SPP at the same price with no VWAP alternative. The raising is under-written by Macquarie and Bell Potter and placement represents 9.5% of issued capital. The placement outcome announcement talked of strong demand exceeding supply and an allocation policy based on pro-rata for existing holders. The stock soared to $4.38 when trading resumed so the SPP is likely to be swamped and the placement was clearly under-priced. Disclosed 8800 shareholders in the 2019 annual report so the theoretical maximum in applications for the SPP is $264 million so stand by for a heavy scale back. Ended up receiving $30 million in SPP applications and the board lifted the $10m cap to $12m and applied a scale back based on size of holding with a minimum allocation of $1000. Fair enough. 5/10

August 4: Sezzle (SZL): Announced a $US60 million raising with a placement under-written by Ord Minnett at $5 but then priced in a bookbuild which finished at $5.30, raising $79 million. Followed by a $7.2 million SPP which was swamped with $78.2 million in applications with an extraordinary participation rate of 72.6% (4395 out of 6055 shareholders applied). Directors refused to expand the $7.2m cap so $71 million or some 92% of application monies were refunded with the scale back formula based on size of holding. At least the SPP outcome announcement included a table showing that only those with more than 100,000 shares received the full $30,000 allocation. Stock was above $7 during the offer period, which explains the strong demand. The buy now pay later sector is certainly hot. 2/10

August 3: Helloworld (HLO): a $50 million capital raising comprising a $27 million placement at $1.65, a hefty 16% discount to the previous close of $1.965 and accessing the expanded placement rules given it comprised 24.3% of issued capital. Twinned with a 1-for-9 entitlement offer at $1.65 with unlimited overs comprising a $17.5m institutional component and a $5.4m retail offer. CEO Andrew Burnes took up $5m in new stock or 70% of his entitlement and Qantas chose to be diluted. Placement outcome announcement curiously claimed a 97% take-up rate by institutions. Stock was trading at a discount shortly before retail offer closed so likely to finish short despite unlimited overs. The 3 biggest shareholders were all diluted with Burnes dropping by 3.2% to 28.15%, Qantas dipping from 15.4% to 12.8%, and Spiros Alysandratos droping by around 1% to 17%. Fidelity picked up the slack, moving from nothing to 8% after spending $6.66 million. 4/10

July 30: Afterpay (APT): Announced a $650m placement at a floor price of $61.75 but then ended up pricing it at $66, a modest 2.9% discount to the previous close of $68. The founders also sold $270 million worth of stock into the same bookbuild at $66. A $150 million SPP followed at $66 or the 5 day VWAP with no discount, although it is capped at $20,000 per investor. Afterpay only completed its last $15,000 SPP in January when $240 million poured in chasing $30 million at the $23 offer price and the board lifted the overall amount by 10% to $33 million. This partially explains the $20,000 cap because no investor can receive more than $30,000 through an SPP in any 12 month period. Ended up accepting all $136 million in applications with good transparency on participation data as company disclosed offer was sent to 53,465 holders with 10,110 applications and a participation rate of 19%. The minimum application through the SPP was $1000. 6/10

July 29, Capricorn Metals: (CMM): $32.3m placement at $1.90, a 7.8% discount to the previous close with the placement comprising 4.9% of issued capitals. Funds needed for gold project expansion. Mayor shareholder Hawke's Point also sold down from 16.7% to 10% at the same price. No accompanying SPP so 2/10.

July 24, Calidus Resources (CAI): completed $25m placement at 51c, an 8% discount to the 15 day VWAP, to advance East Pilbara gold project. No SPP at all for retail and stock was at 59c on August 7. Very disappointing. 2/10.

July 23: Mincor Resources (MCR): $50 million two-stage placement at 72c with the second $32.7m component subject to shareholder approval in August. Priced at 72c, a 12.2% discount to the previous close. Under-written by Euroz and Macquarie. Twiggy Forrest took up $8.3m reflecting current 13.8% stake and placement outcome announcement committed to pro-rata on a best endeavours basis. $10m SPP at 72c unfairly limited to $15,000 followed and was surprisingly closed two days early on July 22 once $10.4m was through the door. This was tipped as a possibility in the SPP offer document. Stock was only marginally in the money at 75c when SPP closed. No disclosure on participation data with SPP. 5/10

July 21: Home Consortium (HMC): $140 million placement at $2.88, a modest 4% discount to the previous close of $3, followed by a $30m SPP with a 2.5% discount to the 5 day VWAP. Key shareholders such as Chemist Warehouse and Spotlight didn't participate in the placement. Only floated last year so no disclosure of shareholder numbers in an annual report as yet but listed 3223 holders immediately after it floated. Ended up only receiving $10.63m in SPP applications based on a VWAP price of $2.83, a 5c discount to the placement. Poor disclosure in outcome announcement on participation rates or even how the VWAP price was calculated.

July 21: Challenger (CGF): A $270 million placement at $4.89, an 8.1% discount to the previous close of $5.32. Placement represents 9% of issued capital and the follow-on $30 million SPP looks a little skinny as it only represents 10% of the capital raising. The SPP has a secondary pricing based on a 2% discount to the 5-day VWAP and the raising is under-written by Macquarie and Goldman Sachs. SPP received $40m in applications and board expanded it to $35 million, scaling back $5 million based on size of holdings. VWAP pricing was $4.32, a significant discount to the $4.89 paid by instos in the earlier $270m placement. No disclosure on participation rates. 5/10.

July 17: 5G Networks (5GN): $18.3 million placement at $1.23 followed by a $4m SPP at the same price or a 2% discount to VWAP. The original closing date of July 8 was extended to July 17. The price weakened so the VWAP pricing kicked in and $3.87 million worth of SPP stock was issued to 493 retail shareholders at $1.14, a 9c or 7.3% discount to the placement price . See SPP outcome announcement. 5/10

July 9: Alliance Aviation Services (ALZ): $92 million placement at $2.95, a modest 4.8% discount to the previous close of $3.10, to be followed by a $30 million SPP at the same price or a 2% discount to VWAP. The share price weakened and only $3.8 million came through the door from retail and the outcome announcement had good transparency disclosing 304 of the 2550 eligible shareholders applied or some 8.4%. The VWAP pricing based on a 2% discount came into play with retail investors paying $2.85 or 10c less than the institutions. 5/10

July 6: Uniti Group (UWL): $270 million non-renounceable 1-for-1.68 at $1.40 with no ability for retail shareholders to apply for additional shares and no compensation for non-participants. There was no disclosure about the level of take-up by existing institutions in the $152 million institutional offer, with the shortfall allocated at the offer price rather than through a bookbuild that maximised the price and generated some compensation for non-participants. The $118 million retail offer, which is bigger than usual comprising 43.7% of the overall offer, finished 58% or $69 million short despite never trading below the $1.40 offer price. The shortfall went to sub-underwriters selected by Uniti. Goldman Sachs and Merrill Lynch were the under-writers of a badly structured offer that diluted retail investors. 3/10.

July 6: Vicinity Centres (VCX): $1.2 billion placement at $1.48 (an 8.1% discount to the last close of $1.61) followed by $200m SPP at the same price or a 2% discount to VWAP based on the last 5 days of the offer. Billionaire John Gandel agreed to take up $100 million worth of new shares or some 8.33% of the placement. Given that he currently owns 18.2%, he is being diluted and the ASX only got involved with this special waiver because he has board representation. The placement outcome announcement made it clear some new shareholders joined the register with the company using its discretion. Only received $32.6m in SPP applications from 2400 shareholders given share price weakness so no scale back given $200m cap. The VWAP pricing kicked at at $1.44, a discount to the $1.48 placement price. See SPP completion announcement. 5/10.

July 3: Blackmores (BKL): $92 million placement at $72.50, an 8.1% discount to the last close of $78.85, followed by a capped $25m SPP with VWAP pricing based on a 2.5% discount over both the last day and the last 5 days. An unusually long offer period from June 3 until July 3 and then another unusual delay until July 15 for the SPP stock to trade. Largest shareholder Marcus Blackmore didn't participate and was diluted down to around 21.5%. With around 18,000 shareholders, the theoretical maximum for the SPP is $540 million but retail are only being offered 4.63% of this amount and 21.3% of the overall $117 million raising. The placement outcome announcement committed to pro-rata for institutional component with some new shareholders coming in under board discretion based on alignment. Ended up receiving $77m in SPP applications and responded by lifting the cap from $25m to $49m with a pro rata scale back and a $1000 minimum allocation. Good transparency on 25% SPP participation rate. 5/10.

July 3: Kogan.com (KGN): $100m placement at $11.45, a 7.5% discount to the previous close, followed by $15m SPP at the same price with no VWAP alternative. Seems opportunistic given the company's cash balance and the recent run up in its share price. The executives were recently issued options at much cheaper prices. Was more than 30% in the money on the closing data so no surprise the offer was flooded with $115m in applications. The board only lifted the cap modestly by $5m to $20m, causing a $95 million refund equivalent to 82% of all applications. The scale back formula was pro-rata based size of holding with no minimum. There was a good table explaining the allocations in the SPP outcome announcement and participation hit 52%, a rare majority, as 6793 of the 13,015 eligible shareholders applied for SPP shares. 4/10

July 3: Sky City Casino (SKC): Launched a $NZ230 million placement at $NZ2.50, a 6.4% discount to the previous close of $NZ2.67, which will be followed by a $NZ50m SPP with investors able to apply for up to $NZ50,000 ($A47,000) worth of new shares. Excellent transparency in the placement outcome announcement and good to see disclosure that the SPP comprises 22% of the capital raising when retail investors only own 21% of the company. The SPP offer document also made it very clear that the $NZ50 million cap won't be lifted and the allocation policy in the event of a scale back will be pro rata based on the size of your holding. This was academic in the end because applications only totalled $NZ45.6 million and the $NZ4.4 million shortfall went to the under-writers, a rarity with SPPs in the Australian market.

July 3: Super Retail Group (SUL): $203 million non-renounceable entitlement offer at $7.19, an 8% discount to the previous close of $7.81. Founder Reg Rowe agreed to take up his full $59.2 million entitlement (29.1%) and therefore won't be diluted. The $158 million institutional component (including Reg Rowe) was 95% subscribed with no disclosure on who got the $8 million shortfall. The failure to allow 10,000 retail shareholders to apply for additional shares in the $44 million retail offer, despite a specific written request to do so, has guaranteed a retail shortfall. Macquarie and UBS were the joint managers and under-writers, taking a fee of $2.05%, excluding the Reg Rowe component. The retail offer was well in the money but only attracted a 69% take up ($30.4m) so the unknown under-writers picked up $13.64m worth of shortfall stock which should have either been auctioned off to the highest bidder or offered to other retail investors. 3/10

July 2: Temple & Webster (TPW): a $40 million placement at $5.70, a 9.7% discount to the last close of $6.31. No wonder it talked about heavy demand. Very disappointing to not have any form of follow-up SPP for retail investors. Stock was at $7.60 in early July so clear lost value and dilution for retail investors who are still waiting for their SPP. 1/10

June 29: IRESS (IRE): $150m placement at $10.42, a 7% discount to the last close of $11.21, followed by a $20m SPP at the placement price or a 2% discount to the closing price on the last day of the offer or the VWAP over the last 5 days, whichever is lower. The placement comprises 8.2% of issued capital and the board has signaled that any SPP scale back will be based on the size of an applicant's holding. The board has not disclosed what proportion of IRESS was owned by retail shareholders going into the capital raising but if all 7,366 shareholder applied for the maximum $30,000, it would be dealing with $221 million in applications. The SPP comprises 11.76% of the capital raising. The placement outcome announcement committed to pro rata for applicants with the board using discretion based on alignment for the balance. The SPP outcome announcement disclosed a 30.4% participation and indirectly revealed applications totalled $42 million. The cap was lifted by $5m to $25 million and the scale back was based on size of holding but with a minimum allocation of $2500. 5/10

June 25, Atlas Alteria (ALX): $420 million placement at $6.20, a 7.5% discount to the last close of $6.70, followed by a $30,000 SPP capped at $75 million for retail investors. The placement outcome announcement stressed there was strong demand with all stock allocated to existing shareholders, suggesting it could have been priced more aggressively. With 25,000 shareholders the theoretical maximum for the SPP is $750 million with retail being offered 10% of this amount and 15% of the overall raising. This broadly aligned with the retail share of the register revealed in last year's $1.35 billion capital raising which included an $898 million entitlement offer, 16% or $145 million of which came through retail shareholders. Was only marginally in the money at the close but still attracted $180 million in applications and the board failed to lift the cap. The scale back was based on size of holding with a minimum allocation to all of $1000. Good transparency on SPP participation which hit 35.7% as 9300 out of 26,000 shareholders applied. See announcement. 5/10

June 25, Infratil (IFT): The NZ-based infrastructure investor announced a $NZ250 million placement at $NZ4.76, an 8% discount to the previous close, followed by a $NZ50 million SPP with investors capped at $NZ50,000 each. The SPP had an alternative pricing based on a 2.5% discount to the 5-day VWAP which came into play with retail investors charged $NZ4.65, an 11c discount to the placement price. Surprisingly strong SPP demand of $NZ131m from 10,829 applicants but the board refused to lift the $NZ50m cap and imposed a scale back based on size of holding with no minimum allocation. See SPP outcome announcement. 5/10

June 25, Arena REIT (ARF): $60 million placement, upsized from $50m, at $2.28, a 5% discount to the previous close, followed by a $10 million SPP, priced with an adjustment for distribution guidance and with no VWAP pricing alternative. Placement conclusion announcement committed to pro-rata for applicants but no disclosure about how the shortfall was handled. Ended up accepting all $24.9 million in SPP applications with no scale back. See announcement. 6/10

June 24, Aspen Group (APZ): $20 million raising at $1.10 with $17 million through a placement followed by a $3m SPP with no VWAP pricing alternative. Unusual element saw a major shareholder decline to participate and then also decline to exit through the bookbuild process. See placement outcome announcement. The SPP was scaled back to the cap of $3 million with no disclosure of total applications and using a formula capped at 19 times your holding so that "this scaling methodology prevents a disproportionate allocation of stock to holders with nominal security holdings." 5/10

June 24, Peninsula Energy (PEN): announced a $40.3 million pro-rata entitlement offer at a massive 45% discount to the previous close that it described as “renounceable”. Shareholders can sell their entitlements on market between June 9 and June 17, but if they don't sell on market or take up the 9-for-5 offer at 7.1c, the directors will simply sell off the shortfall to whoever they like at the offer price of 7.1c. In other words, take it up or get massively diluted and if you do nothing you get nothing but heavy dilution. True renounceability would see the under-writer conduct a competitive auction of the shortfall and any premium achieved above the 7.1c offer price returned to the non-participating shareholders as compensation. 5/10

June 22, Aeris Resources:
2.02-for-1 non-renounceable entitlement offer at 3c to raise $40 million. Under-written by Euroz and Bell Potter. Retail offer was only 26% subscribed with $2.6 million coming in, including less than $200,000 in the "overs" offer. The shortfall offer attracted about $6 million in bids at the 3c offer price with $93m shares or $2.8 million worth of stock finishing up with the under-writers. See outcome announcement. Stock never closed below 3c after the offer closed so no damage for either participants or the under-writer. 6/10.

June 18, United Malt (UMG): $140 million placement at $3.80 followed by a $25 million SPP at the placement price or a 2% discount to VWAP over the last 5 days of the offer period. Was priced at an 11.4% discount to the last close of $4.29 and the stock closed at $4.10 on May 15. With almost 13,000 shareholders, the theoretical maximum in SPP applications is around $400 million. Ended up receiving $62.9 million in applications and lifted the cap to $30.6 million imposing a scale back model based on size of holding but with a minimum allocation of 264 shares costing $1003. See SPP outcome announcement which had good participation disclosure. 5/10

June 18, Novonix (NVX): a curious $58 million placement priced at just 29c, a massive 56% discount to the last trade. Comprises a $5.65m institutional placement, plus a strategic placement to Rich Lister Trevor St Baker of up to $19.4m and then a 1-for-1 entitlement offer to raise $38 million. The size of the discount and the selective placement looks awful in terms of retail dilution but the stock rocketed to a high of $1.40 on June 10 before retreating again. The huge discount meant the retail offer finished only 3.3% short with just $1.3 million worth of stock available. Controversially, 3.61 million shares or $1 million worth of stock was given to sub-underwriters and all applicants for additional shares were scaled back to a maximum of 1724 shares costing just $500. There was no disclosure on total applications (suspect over-subscriptions exceeded $10m) or the numbers of shareholders who were given the offer and applied to take it up. See outcome announcement.

June 17, Decmil (DCG) $52 million raising structured as a non-renounceable 4.2-for-1 at 5c. The previous trade before a month long suspension was at 20c so existing shareholders will take a huge haircut if they don't take up their entitlement. See power point presentation. The $20.3 million retail component finished 65% subscribed and shareholders were able to subscribe for unlimited additional shares although there was no disclosure of the breakdown in the outcome announcement. 6/10 thanks to unlimited overs.

June 12, Panoramic Resources (PAN): $90 million raising at the heavily discounted price of 7c comprising a $29 million placement and a $61m 1.15-for-1 non-renounceable entitlement offer at 7c with retail shareholders limited to "overs" of 50% of entitlement. Western Areas is entering as a 19.9% shareholder via the placement and a priority entitlement to the retail shortfall. Last trade was 12c so this 41% discount is a terrible deal for retail investors who get heavily diluted, particularly those who don't participate. The institutional component raised $52m including $23.2m for the accelerated offer with the large $38m retail entitlement offer, which included overs, finishing 66% subscribed, leaving a big shortfall for Western Areas. 3/10

June 11, Breville (BRG): $94 million placement at $17 followed by a $10 million under-written SPP with no VWAP alternative. UBS and Goldman Sachs are joint under-writers and Solomon Lew's interests have declined to participate so will be marginally diluted down from current 33% stake although the raising only represents 4.7% of existing capital. With about 3400 retail shareholders the maximum SPP application is around $100 million. Seems a bit rough to limit the SPP to just 9.6% of the raising, particularly when the Lew interests are not participating. Placement completed in record time after being launch at 6.45pm on May 13 and then with completion announcement lodged at 9.06am on May 14. Stock above $20 throughout the SPP offer period so no surprise when $54.7 million came through the door. The board stuck with the $10m cap, so a heavy 80%-plus scale back based on side of holding with a minimum allocation of 30 shares costing $510. Good transparency on participation with 3104 holders applying or 44.25% of the eligible cohort. 5/10

June 9,
Incitec Pivot (IPL) $600 million placement at $2, an 8.7% discount to previous close of $2.19 followed by a $75m SPP at the placement price or a 2% discount to the 5 day VWAP. Around 40,000 shareholders so theoretical SPP maximum of $1.2 billion and they have been allocated 11.1% of $675 million raising. This is around the 30th largest placement of all time - see full list of biggest placements. Wrote to them on May 11 requesting a range of transparency measures including maximum disclosure in the placement completion announcement. They revealed that only $12 million went to non-shareholders. The SPP outcome announcement did not reveal participation data and the $57.5 million in applications finished short of the $75m cap so there was no scaleback. 5/10

June 9, Nickel Mines (NIC): A $231 million non-renounceable 1-for-3.6 entitlement offer at 50c to fund Indonesia expansion. Priced at an 11.5% discount to the previous close of 56.5c and retail shareholders can apply for unlimited additional shares. The $179m institutional component was 75% subscribed by existing holders, which is lower than average, meaning new holders picked up at the shortfall at 50c with no compensation paid to non-participants. The $53 million retail offer attracted $32 million in entitlement applications, $7 million in applications for additional shares and under-writers picked up the remaining $14 million shortfall. The offer was in-the-money for the duration but still fell short with no compensation for non-participants. No data was provided on participation rates by shareholder. 6/10

June 4, Open Pay (OPY): $33.7 million placement at $2.40, a 9.8% premium to the previous close. No SPP offer for retail investors but at least the placement was a premium. Stock up at $2.90 by July 10. 4/10.

June 2,
Credit Corp (CCP) $120 million placement at $12.50, an 11.6% discount to the previous close of $14.14. To be followed by a $30 million SPP at the placement price or a 2.5% discount to the VWAP over the last 5 days of the offer. Made this allocations announcement given placement exceeded 15% and disclosed that 12% of the placement went to new shareholders. The company has a history of scaling back SPPs after it did a $125 million placement in April 2019 and proposed to cap its follow on SPP at just $10 million, but then expanded this to $15 million after strong demand of about $40 million. Wrote to them on April 29 requesting the SPP cap be lifted and they ended up accepting an additional $5 million to accept $35 million of the $102 million in applications. They were calling shareholders to sell the offer which was an odd tactic given the likelihood of a heavy scale back. See SPP outcome announcement which disclosed there was 5400 applicants but not how many shareholders were eligible to apply. 5/10

June 2,
National Storage (NSR) $300 million placement at $1.57, a 7.1% discount to last trade of $1.69, using the extra placement capacity rule to expand its issued capital by an excessive 24.1%. Was followed by an under-sized $30m SPP equivalent to just 9.1% of the $330 million with no VWAP pricing alternative. The 6,300 retail shareholders could apply for $189 million in stock. Predator Abacus has just under 5% and was deliberately diluted. Joint under-writer JP Morgan also agreed to provide an additional $100m debt facility, something we haven't seen negotiated with many other equity under-writers. The special placement allocations announcement didn't reveal anything meaningful about what proportion of the placement went to new shareholders. Ended up accepting all $48 million of SPP applications, so a 60% expansion beyond the original $30m cap. See SPP outcome announcement which didn't include any participation data. 6/10.

June 2, Australian Finance Group (AFG): $60 million raising comprising a $15 million placement at a 17.3% discount of $1.15 followed by a non-renounceable 1-for-5.5 at $1.15 with certain insiders partially under-writing the retail offer. Retail can't apply for overs which is a bad thing, particularly with insiders under-writing the guaranteed shortfall. The retail offer was 78% subscribed with $10.1 million raised and an additional $2.96 million coming from the under-writers. With the shares at $1.70 when the retail outcome was announced, this ended up being heavily dilutive for retail investors when combining the impact of the placement, the size of the discount and the retail shortfall. 2/10.

May 29, Ingenia (INA) $150 million placement at $3.45 followed by a $25 million SPP at the same price or a 2% discount to the 5 day VWAP leading up to the May 29 close. This only proposes giving retail 14.3% of the $175 million capital raising when a $109.8 million entitlement offer last year suggested retail owned 16.7% of the register at the time. However, this would have been diluted by the accompanying $21.3m placement at the time, plus the fact that the $18.4 million retail component finished 26% short after applications for additional shares were limited to 15% of an entitlement. Only has about 3500 holders so the theoretical maximum for the SPP is $105 million and the company ended up accepting all $27.9 million in SPP applications, marginally lifting the $25 million cap. Only about 30% of shareholders participated even though it was more than 20% in the money. 6/10

May 29, Dicker Data (DDR) $50m placement at $6.70, a 6.7% discount to the last trade of $7.18. Placement only comprises 4.6% of issued capital and to be followed by a $5m SPP at the placement price of a 2% discount to VWAP closing on May 29. With 7000 retail shareholders, the theoretical maximum in SPP applications is $210 million. Wrote to them on May 7 requesting some transparency measures and that the $5m SPP cap be lifted. In the end, the cap was lifted from $5m to $15m after $53.7 million came through the door. Scale back was pro rata with a minimum allocation of $1000 worth of shares and good transparency on participation rates which hit an impressive 40.7% with the average application being $15,000. See outcome announcement. 5/10.

May 27, Newcrest Mining (NCM): $1 billion placement at $26.50 followed by a $100m SPP at the same price or a 2% discount to VWAP. With 54,000 retail holders, the theoretical maximum is $1.62 billion so significant scale back risk with retail only allocated 9.1% of the raising. Wrote to them on May 12 requesting a range of transparency and disclosure measures, including an increase in the $100 million cap, particularly given Newcrest restricted retail investors to just $5000 each during its last SPP in 2009 when the maximum was $15,000. In the end, 15,574 of the 54,107 eligible shareholders applied and with $300 million through the door, they expanded the raising to $200 million and used a scale back formula based on size of holding with no minimum allocation. See outcome announcement which failed to explain how many shares applicants would receive. 6/10.

May 26, Lend Lease (LLC): $950 million placement at $9.80 followed by a $200m SPP at $9.80 or a 2% discount to VWAP (last 5 day and last day). Placement is equivalent to 17.2% of capital so ASIC and ASX will have to be provided the allocation spreadsheet. Closes Tuesday May 26 and allotted 7 business days later on Thursday June 4. Wrote to them on April 28 requesting a range of transparency measures and a bit disappointed with the lack of detail in this placement conclusion announcement suggesting some stock was issued to non-shareholders, in contrast to what NAB did. In the end, the SPP attracted $429.4 million in applications and the board lifted the $200 million cap to $300 million and refunded $129.4 million. This meant retail contributed 24% of the $1.25 billion capital raising. The board said this was "designed to maintain the relativity between retail and institutional shareholders after the equity raising to what it was immediately prior to the equity raising". Indeed, but why didn't they propose that from the start? 6/10.

May 26, Charter Hall Social Infrastructure (CQE): $100m placement comprising 15% of issued capital at $2.20, a 7.6% discount to the last close of $2.38, followed by a $15m SPP at $2.20 or a 2% discount to VWAP on either the closing date or the last 5 days, which ever is lower. Requested an increase in the SPP cap but also thanked them for adopting VWAP pricing after sister REIT Charter Hall Retail didn't offer this the previous week. End up accepting all $23.1 million in SPP applications. See announcement. Has some history with lifting capped SPPs, after it set a $5m cap on an offer earlier in 2020 but then received $19.3m in applications, which were all commendably accepted. 6/10

May 22, NAB (NAB): $3 billion fixed price placement at $14.15 followed by $500m SPP at the same price or a 2% discount to VWAP. Closes on Friday May 22 and allotted 7 business days later on June 2. A fail due to the excessively capped SPP although the board could always choose to lift the cap. The 500,000-plus retail shareholders owned 48% of the bank before the placement and if they all apply, more than $15 billion will come through the door even though retail are only being allocated 14.3% of the raising. Wrote to the board on April 27 requesting an increase in the SPP cap and good detail in this placement conclusion announcement which commendably disclosed that no shares were allocated to non-shareholders. NAB has a history of SPP scalebacks, particularly in 2009 when it maintained a $750 million cap despite receiving $2.6 billion in applications. In the end, 155,000 shareholders applied for $2.9 billion worth of stock and the board lifted the cap to $1.25 billion using a pro-rata scale back method based on size of holding but with a minimum allocation of $2500. See outcome announcement. The $1.65 billion refund was only beaten by NAB's own $1.85 billion refund in 2009. Good transparency in the outcome announcement besides not releasing a table showing how many shares applicants would be allocated based on the size of their holding. 4/10.

May 21, Infomedia (IFM): $70 million placement at $1.50 followed by a $30,000 SPP for retail investors capped at $15 million and with alternative pricing based on a 2% discount to VWAP. Wrote to the company and received a considered reply including disclosure that 2% of the placement went to non-shareholders and retail owned 35% of the company before the placement was launched, suggesting an increase in the cap might be in order given that it only envisages retail receiving 17.6% of the $85 million capital raising. Was only marginally in the money so demand of $13.9 million was less than the cap so no scale back. Excellent participation data. See outcome announcement. 6/10.

May 21, Charter Hall Retail (CQR): $275 million placement at $2.90 followed by a $25m SPP at the same price with no VWAP alternative. Closed May 21 and allotted May 28. Engaged over the lack of a VWAP alternative but management declined to make any changes. In the end they lifted the cap and accepted at $29.4 million in applications. See outcome announcement. Declined to provide precise data on participation rates. 5/10

May 21,
Qube (QUB): a $500 million 1-for-6.35 non-renounceable entitlement offer at $1.95 with retail investors invited to apply for additional shares equivalent to 100% of entitlement. Canada's CPP declined to participate in the $264 million accelerated institutional offer but there was 99.3% demand for the balance and "overwhelming demand" for the shortfall. No disclosure as to how the shortfall and CPP's entitlement was allocated in this ASX announcement. The $236 million retail offer to the 27,000 holders closes on May 21 and is allotted on May 28. The average retail offer will be for $8740 worth of new shares with applicants able to apply for double this under the "overs" component which will hopefully ensure it doesn't short. The stock soared to $2.56 after the suspension was lifted so being 31% in the money, let's hope the board runs a strong marketing campaign to maximise participation. Wrote to the company on May 5 and received a considered reply from the CFO pointing out that there hadn't been a shortfall in two previous entitlement offers which had an overs limit of 100% of entitlement. He was right. The entitlement take-up was a staggering 83% and this soared to 138% with the overs, leading to a scale back based on size of holding. See announcement. 7/10

May 20, Ramsay Healthcare (RHC): Launched a $1.2 billion institutional placement on April 22 at a 12.9% discount of $56, under-written by JP Morgan. A $200 million SPP will follow at the same price or a 2% discount to VWAP over the last 5 days of the offer. Ramsay has 80,273 shareholders so the theoretical maximum application for the SPP is worth $2.4 billion and they ended up receiving $695 million after 41,877 shareholders applied for an average amount of $16,596. The $200 million was lifted to $300 million, meaning $395 million was still refunded based on size of holding but with a minimum allocation of $560. Had a number of exchanges with the company and the outcome was reasonable, including excellent transparency on participation rates in the outcome announcement. 6/10

May 20, Monash IVF (MVF): Unveiled an emergency $80m capital raising at 52c, a hefty 26.8% discount to the previous trade of 71c. Comprised a $39.8m placement and a $40.2m 1-for-3 entitlement offer with retail able to apply for overs of 100% of entitlement. Closed May 20. Good disclosure in the outcome announcement which showed a 43% take up of the $15 million retail offer comprising $5.3 million in entitlements and $1.2 million in overs which would have been higher if not limited to 100% of entitlement. 5/10

May 15, Centuria Industrial (CIP): Unveiled a $130m placement at a floor price of $2.54 (an 8% discount) on April 9 2020 but at least the final price was set by a bookbuild and came in at $2.62. A $10 million SPP followed capped at $30,000 per investor, even though the company did an earlier UPP within the past 12 months. There is no VWAP pricing alternative and the raising is under-written by Moelis and JP Morgan. REITs value their assets every six months and really shouldn't be raising capital at a discount to NTA but that is what Centuria did given the NTA was $2.83 as at December 31. This outfit also called an EGM in February 2020 to approve an earlier $154m placement at $3.41 in December 2019 to help fund the purchase of some Arnotts properties. This was not followed by an SPP. Naughty. The latest SPP ended up raising $8.3 million at $2.62 so there was scaleback as this was below the $10m cap. See announcement. 6/10

May 15, Bapcor (BAP): Completed $180m institutional placement at a fixed price of $4.40 and will follow with a $30m SPP which has three pricing options: placement price, 5-day VWAP and last day VWAP. With around 16,000 retail holders, the maximum application is around $480 million. Retail have only been allocated 14.3% of the proposed $210 million capital raising when retail had 30.7% or $67 million of the renounceable $218 million entitlement offer back in 2015. Strong grounds to lift the cap, which they duly did, accepting $56 million of the $122 million in total applications and using a scale back formula giving all applicants a minimum of $1000 worth of shares and 50% of their current holding after that. See announcement. 6/10

May 15, Metcash (MTS): $300 million placement at fixed price of $2.80 under-written by Macquarie followed by a $30m SPP at $2.80 or a 2.5% discount to the 5-day VWAP. Claimed that 95% of the placement went to existing shareholders although no idea how strict the pro-rata allocation policy was. Stock traded at a discount throughout the offer period and ended up being priced at $2.28, an 18.2% discount to the placement price. Only 6.3% of holders or 1214 contributed $13.6 million to the SPP which ended up comprising just 4.3% of the overall $313m capital raising. See SPP outcome announcement which had excellent transparency. 6/10.

May 13, Invocare (IVC): A $150 million placement at $10.40 followed by a $30,000 SPP capped at $50 million. The SPP has an innovative 3rd pricing alternative of VWAP -2% on the closing date, as well as the placement price and a 2% discount to the 5 day VWAP. The stock was trading below the placement price in late April so the VWAP pricing alternatives is likely to come into play. With 24,000 retail holders the theoretical maximum is $720 million. Ended up accepting all $74 million in applications at the placement price of $10.40, even though this exceeded the $50 million cap and the offer was barely in the money. 6/10

May 13, Capitol Health (CAJ): announced a $40 million capital raising at 16c comprising a $30 million placement and a $10 million SPP. Failed to disclose what proportion of the placement went to existing holders. Was priced at an 18% discount to the previous close of 19.5c and has remained in the money ever since. Fully under-written by Shaw Stockbroking. Minimum investment of $2500 in the SPP outlined in the offer document and no VWAP pricing alternative. The SPP outcome announcement was a little hard to understand with no disclosure of the overall amount applied for. The cap wasn't lifted and all applicants ended up with a maximum allocation of around $16,300. Refunds were initially delayed until June 5 but then this was brought forward to May 25. 5/10

May 12, Mesoblast (MSB) Completed a $138 million placement at $3.20 a share, a 7% discount, on May 13 but no sign of any follow-on SPP. Very disappointing as this is the largest stand alone placement we have seen this year where retail shareholder have been completely excluded. The company's 13,000 retail shareholders were also excluded from a $75 million placement in 2019 so it has form when it comes to diluting retail shareholders. Stock closed at $3.67 on July 10 so clear dilution and lost value for retail shareholders. 3/10

May 11, QBE Insurance (QBE): Announced a $US750 million placement at the fixed price of $8.25 to be followed by a $US75 million SPP. The insurance giant has a history of scaling back and shafting retail investors in SPPs so it will be interesting to see if the SPP cap is hard or soft. The placement was priced at a 9.4% discount to the previous close of $9.11. The placement was under water with QBE shares trading below $8 in early May so the alternative pricing of a 2% discount to VWAP has come into play. Wrote to the company on April 29 requesting a range of transparency measures but they declined to provide an update on applications to the ASX, or to inform investors about the VWAP pricing on the last day. Ended up receiving $91 million priced at $7.51 an 8% discount to the $8.25 placement price. 6/10 given always like to see retail paying less than institutions.

May 8, SCA Property (SCP) $250 million placement at $2.16 after a bookbuild with a $50m SPP to follow at $2.16 with no VWAP alternative. Receives a 6/10 because of the bookbuild which limited the discount and proved to be well priced in the aftermarket with the stock only trading around the placement price. Wrote to the CEO and CFO on May 7 and pleased with the detail in this SPP outcome announcement disclosing that the offer went to 60,000 holders and 3.9% or 2350 applied for $29.3 million worth of stock. 5/10 given lack of VWAP pricing for retail.

May 8, Electro Optic Systems (EOS) Completed a $134 million placement at $4.75 managed by Citi followed by $10 million SPP closing on May 8 and allotted on May 14. With 8,357 shareholders, allocating just 7.46% of the capital raising to retail investors seems pretty skinny but the cap was ignored in the end. There was a VWAP pricing alternative but no discount besides being rounded down to the nearest cent. Good disclosure at the end with the offer sent to 8,357 holders and attracting $10.78 million from 740 applicants who paid the VWAP price of $4.40, a 35c discount to the placement price. 6/10 given VWAP pricing, lifting of the cap and good participation transparency.

May 4, IDP Education (IEL): announced a $175m placement at $10.65 and then lifted this to $225 million, whilst retaining the cap on its subsequent SPP at just $15 million. Macquarie collected a $5 million fee based on a 2.2% commission. The discount on the day was 7.9% against the previous closing price of $11.56 and the expanded placement equated to 8.3% of the shares on issue. The $30,000 SPP closes on May 4 and was well in the money throughout the offer period. The higher education provider floated off by Seek a few years back defends the $15m SPP cap on the basis that retail shareholders only own about 4.8% of the stock, yet are getting 6.25% of the raising. Fair point, although it really should be measured on the free float, given that Universities Australia owned 49% before the raising was launched but is now down to around 46%. Good disclosure in the outcome announcement revealing the offer was sent to 2949 shareholders and 1292 applied for $34.5m in stock with a scale back to $29 million based on the size of holding although every shareholder received a minimum of 235 shares. The participation rate was 44% and average application was $26,702. The placement came with an expanded bank facility and deferral of the $41 million interim dividend, so there was some genuine financial waves to contend with. 6/10

May 4, Megaport (MP1) Unveiled a $50m placement on April 8 2020 at $9.50, an 8.9% discount to the previous close of $10.43. A $30,000 SPP at $9.50 will follow, capped at $15 million. The company has a history of scaling back SPPs and doing placements without SPPs. In December 2019 it did a $62m placement at $8.70 (a 4.8% discount) with no SPP and on March 14 2019 it did a $50m placement at $4 a share but then limited the SPP to $10m and $15,000 a pop. It was heavily scaled back after $47.6m in applications were received. The placement capacity was refreshed at the 2019 AGM. Wrote to the company lobbying for the cap to be lifted and after $99 million poured in, the $15 million cap was expanded by 50% to $22.5 million, meaning $76.5 million was still refunded. See SPP outcome announcement. 5/10

May 1, Flight Centre (FLT): The $700 million Flight Centre capital raising included a $282 million placement at $7.20 which diluted retail shareholders and a $418 million 1-for-1.72 non-renounceable entitlement offer at the same price, which was a 27.3% discount to the last traded price of $9.91. The three founders – CEO Graham Turner, Geoff Harris and Bill James – went into this crisis owning a combined 42% of the company and collectively committed $25 million of their $175 million entitlement, diluting themselves into the raising. The total number of shares on issue almost doubled. There is also an ability for retail investors to apply for overs equivalent to 25% of their entitlement, which is way too restrictive from a small shareholder perspective. The founders went in through the institutional offer which was 96% subscribed by eligible instos. They should have gone in through the retail offer and also tucked into the 25% "overs". The $138 million retail offer finished 23% short, attractive $106 million from 13,116 applicants (there were about 22,000 shareholders listed in last year's annual report), including $14 million through the needlessly constrained overs facility which was capped at just 25% of entitlement. The under-writers Macquarie and UBS were on a winner with the stock trading around $10, well clear of the $7.20 offer price. 4/10

May 1,
G8 Education (GEM) On the day last trading day before Easter, G8 Education came up with a $301 million capital raising comprising a $134 million placement and a $167 million 1-for-2.2 entitlement offer which comprised $89 million from institutions and $79 million for retail. So, this was a retail heavy register that started with retail owning 47.3% of the company and will finish with 30-something depending on the size of the retail shortfall. The placement was a tolerable 44.5% of the raising which wasn't as bad as Oil Search but still on the high side. As usual, there was no renounceability and the discount was a hefty 26% with the offer at 80c against a last trade of $1.08. The institutional component of the retail offer was 99.7% subscribed. The retail overs were limited to just 25% of the entitlement and with the stock trading around the 80c issue price, it finished $50 million short, attracting just $25 million from 4198 applicants. There were about 22,000 shareholders listed in the last annual report. At least the retail offer was barely in the money, meaning that the placement wasn't given away too cheaply. The under-writers RBC and UBS were left with a chunk of stock which would have been farmed out to sub-under-writers when the deal was first launched. 4/10

May 1, Dacian Gold: (DCN) There's been a good deal of shareholder anger about the $98 million capital raising because the stock last traded at $1.40 on January 31 before it was suspended. The $98 million raising was priced at 30c and comprised a $30 million placement and a $68 million entitlement offer, $28 million of which is for retail and has unlimited "overs". Retail offer ended up being 74% subscribed, even with unlimited overs, so the $7.3 million shortfall went to the under-writers. Despite a request, no disclosure on how many shareholders applied or the breakdown between entitlements and "overs". 6/10 due to unlimited overs.

April 30, NextDC (NXT) did a $672 million placement at $7.80 which represents 25% of shares on issue making use of emergency relief even though stated reason was “to pursue growth initiatives”. The $15m in transaction fees (2.2% of total proceeds) seemed excessive given the under-writers were on risk for just 24 hours and the offer was pitched at a 15% discount to the previous close. The changes to the capital raising rules were meant to help distressed companies so what on earth was booming data centres company Next DC doing unveiling a $672 million placement when it hasn't been hit by the Covid-19 crisis at all? The best thing about the Next DC raising is that the follow-on SPP is uncapped. Next DC has about 16,500 retail shareholders so the maximum theoretical participation is around $500 million and with two days to go the company advised that $86m had already come through the door. There is talk of anger amongst Next DC's institutional shareholders, some of whom weren't accommodated. That's the problem with placements. It's a secretive share allocation process. If giving away part of the company to non-shareholders, at least there should be some disclosure as to who took the shares. The SPP closed on April 30 and attracted $190 million in applications with no scale back. The participation rate was an impressive 51% as the company embraced best practice disclosure by revealing 8,684 of the 17,015 eligible shareholders applied. 6/10

April 28, Salt Lake Potash (SO4): Completed a $20 million placement at 34c on April 28 but declined to even offer retail shareholders an SPP. Shameful. 1/10.

April 28, De Grey Mining (DEG): $31.2 million placement at 28c on April 28 and no sign of any follow-up SPP. Stock closed at 79.5c on July 10 so shameful dilution without an SPP. 1/10.

April 27, Oil Search (OSH): One of the key measures for fairness in capital raisings is the size of the placement compared with the size of the entitlement offer. Ideally, there would be no placement at all, but if there has to be one, it should comprise no more than one third of the offer. Oil Search has been one of the worst offenders on this front when it launched a $760 million placement which was almost double the size of the 1-for-8 entitlement that raised an additional $400 million. A 1-for-8 is nothing. It clearly should have been the other way around with the a placement of no more than $400 million and an entitlement offer raising double that amount. It is just appalling that in a $1.16 billion offer, retail investors are being offered only 6.9% of the raising ($80 million out of $1.16 billion) when we started out owning 20% of the company. The placement of 362 million new shares at a 23% discount of $2.10 also represented 23.74% of the pre-issue capital so it would have been illegal earlier this year. All up, this is shocker, with the only minor saving grace being that retail shareholders are being offered "overs" which are capped at 200% of their entitlement. The company agreed to a request to publish this progress announcement to the ASX revealing that the offer was 20% subscribed with a week to go. The institutional component of the $320 million entitlement offer was 95% subscribed excluding largest shareholder Mubudala (Abu Dhabi sovereign fund) which didn't participate. Despite being heavily in the money, the retail offer fell $0.5 million short with applications for entitlements totalling $39.4 million and "overs" coming in at $40.1 million. This is a clear lesson about the need for unlimited "overs" when an offer is non-renounceable. See announcement. 3/10

April 27, Southern Cross Media (SXL): $169m raising at 9c comprising a $47 million placement and a $121 million entitlement offer. The placement comprised a ridiculous 68% of the pre-raising shares (522 million shares at 9c against 768.7m before the raising was launched). Stock had doubled to 18c by April 15 so massive dilution for retail shareholders. Non participants receive no compensation. Institutions took up 92% of their entitlements to the $102 million entitlement offer leaving an $8.16 million shortfall with the unknown sub-under-writers. The $20 million retail offer will no doubt finish well short given the lack of overs. Have asked them to crank up a solid marketing campaign and was delighted when they released this announcement to the ASX revealing the offer had been 18.6% subscribed with a week to go. The final announcementrevealed 66% of the shares were taken up but gave nothing on the numbers who participated. The $6.8 million shortfall went to the under-writers and with the 9c shares trading at 12-13, it was money for jam for them. 2/10 given huge discount and lack of any overs.

April 24, Reece (REH): The plumbing supplies giant has shown how to do it, becoming the first issuer to ever follow an institutional placement with an entitlement offer that was also twinned with an SPP for retail. The detail is all spelt out here but this is very bold for a capital raising because it sets the precedent which says: “any company which does an institutional placement should also do an SPP on the same terms, regardless of whether there is an entitlement offer thrown into the mix as well.” Normally, after a placement, retail will get a token SPP or there will be an entitlement offer if the situation is more pressing, just like occurred so many times during the GFC. But we never get both. Asciano is the only issuer I can think of that did a make-good SPP after a placement/entitlement combo but it wasn't at the time same. Here is the 2009 SPP outcome announcement explaining how the Asciano offer was scaled back from $290 million to $100 million but retail shareholders had still successfully topped up after the earlier dilutive placement and entitlement offer. Tellingly, then Asciano chairman Tim Poole is now deputy chair of Reece. The $600 million Reece package involved a $368 million placement at the fixed price of $7.60, which was a 12.5% discount to the last closing price of $8.69. There was also a 3-for-55 non-renounceable entitlement offer at the same price to raise $232 million and the $42 million institutional component was more than 99% subscribed. The three Wilson brothers are collectively in for their full $170 million slice of that, coming in through the $190 million retail offer. The Wilson's will be scaled back from 73% to 67% by the placement and a little further by the SPP. The 4894 eligible Reece retail shareholders had a theoretical maximum take-up of $147 million in the SPP which wasn't capped. In the end, 1991 of them applied for $47 million worth of SPP shares with an average application of $23,600 and a healthy take up rate of 40.6%. The $20 million retail entitlement offer (ex Wilsons) also had unlimited overs and the scale back formula saw all applicants receive a minimum of $15,000 worth of share, although it was not disclosed how many shareholders participated in the entitlement offer, which finished 64% subscribed as $12.8 million came through the door, along with an extra $10 million in applications for additional shares. See outcome announcement. 7/10

April 24, Auckland Airport (AIA): the first issuer to embrace price discovery when it launched a $NZ1 billion placement, under-written at the floor price of $NZ4.50 but where the final price was set by a competitive book build which came in at $NZ4.66, the top of a 16c indicative range given to bidders. A $NZ50,000 SPP for retail followed to raise up to $NZ200 million. Wrote to the company requesting that the $NZ200m cap be lifted if demand is strong. Was well in the money at the close and they imposed a heavy scale back after receiving $NZ489 million in applications from 32,619 holders. The average application was only $NZ15,000 and the scale back was based on size of holding. See announcement. 4/10

April 23, Cochlear (COH): an $880 million placement at $140, followed by a $50 million SPP which is patently too small. Failings were not having a bookbuild to set the placement price, unfairly limiting the SPP and allocating too many shares to a single London-based fund manager, Veritas Asset Management, which picked up an astonishing 34% of the $880 million Cochlear placement. We only know this because Veritas launched a buying splurge shortly before and after the placement to finish up with a 5.57% stake which was above the 5% substantial shareholder rule in Australia and was therefore disclosed to the ASX on April 2. It really is offensive that 36,724 retail shareholders were proposed to be limited to $50 million, when one London fund manager was given more than 6 times that amount of shares in a discounted placement. In the end, Cochlear received $417 million in applications from 16,651 shareholders, a 45% participation rate. The board lifted the SPP cap to $220 million but still refunded $197 million, the bulk of which went to smaller shareholders because the allocation formula favoured bigger holders. All is explained in this 3 page ASX announcement from Cochlear at the end of the offer, which did well on the transparency front. Retail finished up receiving 20% of a $1.1 billion capital raising which the board claimed doesn't material change the pre-raising allocations. I suspect retail had a touch more than 20% before the placement launch and it remains remarkable that board seriously thought it could limit retail to just $50m. Do the maths. If all 36,724 holders had applied for the maximum $30,000 new shares in the SPP, that would have brought in $1.1 billion. The majority of Cochlear's shareholders, 20,073 in fact, didn't bother applying at all and they are the biggest losers in Australia's capital raising system. Only a renounceable offer would fairly compensate these investors, many of whom are never even told about the offer by their financial adviser or fund. 5/10

April 21, Webjet (WEB): raised $346 million broken down into 3 components, $115 million in a placement at $1.70, $116 million from the accelerated institutional entitlement offer at $1.70 and $115m from the 1-for-1 non-renounceable retail offer. Foreign private equity firm Bain took $25m through the placement. Non-participants in the retail offer got nothing but participants could apply for overs equivalent to 100% of their entitlement. The institutional component was 90% subscribed leaving an $11.6 million shortfall which went to unknown parties at no premium. The discounted pricing was the most offensive element because the stock last traded at $3.76 before it was suspended and when it resumed trading it finished the week on April 3 at $2.73, a massive 60% premium to the $1.70 placement price. It used the supersized waiver alongside the new emergency relief to arrive at the placement component of the raising representing 50% (after upsizing the placement and underwritten entitlement offer following strong demand) of shares on issue when the raising was announced. The retail offer closed on April 21 and Webjet attracted strong support with applications worth $86m, plus a further $46.7 million in overs. This led to a $14.5m scale back where investors were cut from 100% overs to 69%. The outcome announcement also included excellent data on participation rates. Unlike with Kathmandu, this strongly in-the-money offer was well supported but there was still 11,427 shareholders who declined an offer to buy new shares at $1.70 when the stock was trading well north of $2. 4/10

April 17, Kathmandu (KMD): Sometimes existing shareholders just don't have the capacity to participate in a rushed capital raising during a crisis and that can see them massively diluted. That's exactly what happened to New Zealand entrepreneur Rod Duke whose Briscoe business used to be the largest shareholder in retailer Kathmandu with a 16.3% stake. However, with the broader retail sector in crisis, he couldn't afford to participate and was subsequently diluted down to just 6.77% without any compensation. Kathmandu is suffering indigestion after paying $350 million in cash for Rip Curl in November last year and has now embarked on an emergency $NZ207 million capital raising comprising a $NZ30 million placement and a $NZ177m 1.2-for-1 entitlement offer at NZ50c. However, because the offer wasn't renounceable, when Briscoe rejected the offer, its shares were just given away to new investors at NZ50c. Leaving aside the Briscoe shares, institutions took up 96% of their entitlements. The $NZ53 million retail component offered unlimited "overs" but only attracted $NZ26.5m in applications along with $NZ17 million in overs to finish 18% short as investors declined to take up $NZ9.5 million worth of stock which was comfortably in the money. This was another windfall for the under-writers with the stock at around A70c shortly after the retail shares were allotted on April 22. No disclosure on how many shareholders participated. 5/10.

April 16, Oohmedia (OML): One of the oldest tricks in the book is for big corporate, institutional or insider shareholders to creep up a share register by under-writing the retail component of a non-renounceable entitlement offer. That is what we've got with the emergency $167 million raising from debt-laden outdoor advertising company oOH!media, which comprised a $39 million placement at 53c, plus a 1-for-1 entitlement offer for existing shareholders at the same price with no overs. The stock had last traded at 84c before the offer was launched. The ability to apply for extra shares was presumably banned because major shareholder HMI, a US-based investment fund, had aspirations to lift its stake from 18% to 25% and intended to average down its entry price through both the placement and the retail shortfall. Boards should never prioritise under-writers over retail shareholders when it comes to dealing with the retail shortfall. This company made used of the supersized waiver to allow it to make a placement of 30% on the basis that it was also conducted a one-for-one entitlement offer. The accelerated component of the institutional entitlement offer was supported by 91% of institutional shares and raised $117 million. The shortfall was allocated to unknown parties at no premium. The retail component was only worth $14 million and was not renounceable with no overs. All 3400 retail shareholders should have taken up their entitlement but it finished 27% short with $4 million worth of stock going to the under-writers. No disclosure of how many shareholders participated. 2/10.

April 15, Carbon Revolution (CBR): Was first out of the blocks with a $25 million placement at $1.50 that completed on March 18. Followed up with a $3m SPP closing April 15 which attracted $2.73 million in applications from 252 shareholders with an average application of $10,833. Only 8.25% of the 3053 shareholders participated because it was out of the money for part of the offer period and they failed to offer a VWAP pricing alternative. Wrote to them asking for extra transparency on the retail participation rates and was very pleased when they delivered and joined our best practice list. 7/10.

April 3, Red 5 Mining (RED) The Perth-based gold miner did a $125 million placement at 18c with no SPP for retail shareholders. This comprised 55.8% of pre-raising capital and therefore needed shareholder approval. Was priced at a 23.4% discount to the last price and the stock was at 21c in mid May so the existing 4800 retail shareholders have been diluted without compensation. Stock was at 23c in early July so placement price wasn't too cheap in hindsight. 3/10