3 questions lodged at 2025 Zip hybrid AGM
November 7, 2025
Below is the text of the 3 written questions submitted at the 47 minute ZIP virtual AGM held at 10am on November 5, 2025 via the Computershare platform. See notice of meeting and voting results with no protest votes. Market cap was $4.85 billion on AGM day and the proxies weren't disclosed early in the formal addresses. See excessive 12 questions asked at 2022 AGM
Q1. Could the chair and CEO please comment on what contact they still have with our two founders Larry Diamond and Peter Gray. Are they still involved in the business and there are constraints still in place if they wanted to compete against us or publicly criticise the company?
Answer: The chair... Watch video of exchange via Twitter.
Q2.With the benefit of hindsight, does the chair have any regrets about the structure of last year's $267m capital raising. Surely the placement component of $217m at $1.61 was too large and it was unfair to reject $35.1m of the $85.1m in SPP applications, instead sticking rigidly to the unfairly constrictive $50m cap. We went into that raising with around 33,000 retail shareholders and even when only 13% of them or 4301 holders attempted to participate, you then rejected 41% of what they applied for. Dozens of listed companies have uncapped SPPs over the year after strong demand, why didn't we do that instead of leaving the SPP component at just 18.7% of a $267m capital raisings. Did the big end of town institutional investors really deserves more than 4 times as much stock as your loyal retail shareholders?
Answer: The chair... Watch video of exchange via Twitter.
Q3. The 2022-23 annual report claimed we had 108,075 shareholders, albeit 76,856 with what was then less than a marketable parcel of $500 given the low share price at the time. Do you agree that you badly structured the unmarketable parcel buyout program in late 2023 which took out a whopping 69,669 small holders, collectively paying them just $12.5 million for their 30.86 million shares at an exit price of just 40.34c. Has there ever been an unmarketable offer by an ASX listed company which took 64.4% of all shareholders and does the chair agree this is a bad look given that the share price has since soared 934% to $3.77. In other words, you took out almost 70,000 small shareholders for a miserable $12.5m when those same shares today, if retained, would be worth $116.3m. You sold these shares to mainly institutional investors on market and then had the gall to impose a 41% scale back on the remaining shareholders in the 2024 SPP. It's not a good look, is it? Why did you structure that unmarketable parcel so that the shareholders who did nothing, lost their shares? Do you agree that having this aggressive default option took advantage and disadvantaged small unsophisticated retail shareholders?
Answer: This was the longest written question have ever submitted. Watch video of question being asked via Twitter, plus this response from chair Diane Smith-Gander.
Copyright © 2025 The Mayne Report. All rights reserved
