3 questions lodged at 2025 Neurizon hybrid AGM
November 27, 2025
Below is the text of the 3 written questions submitted at the 26 minute Neurizon Therapeutics (NUZ) 3pm hybrid in Melbourne (L25, 101 Collins) and via Automic platform. Market cap $70m after a poor year. The proxies were not disclosed early with the formal addresses and after the formals were dealt with there was a big preso by the CEO Dr Michael Thurn on their exciting drug development prospects. There was a 10.3% rem report protest vote and the additional placement capacity resolution was defeated with 31.8% against.
Q1. Why didn't we offer retail shareholders a chance to participate in the recent capital raising on the same terms as the institutional placement? I'll be voting against resolution 3 as I don't want to encourage you to do this again. Why don't you treat retail shareholders with more respect in capital raisings and will you launch an SPP before next year's AGM.
Answer: Neurizon recently did a $5m insto placement with no SPP for retail shareholders. Dreadful question censorship by the wrangler and then just motherhood comments by the chair. Watch video of exchange via Twitter.
Q2. Could Marcus Hughes please provide a summary of his history on public company boards in terms of treatment of retail shareholders in capital raisings. How many times has he offered an SPP to retail shareholders after a placement and what is his overall approach? Does he agree that brokers which advise companies on capital raisings have a conflict of interest because they get paid as much as 6% on placements but receive no commission when retail shareholders provide capital through an SPP?
Answer: The only director up for election gave a big stump speech but then this question was never asked, partly because they failed to follow the agenda and dealt with questions as one job lot at the end.
Q3. Why do you keep asking for an extra 10% placement capacity and are you aware that resolutions like this have been defeated at many AGMS this season. Shareholders generally don't like this. Next time you raise capital, will you consider doing a pro-rata issue which treats all shareholders equally, rather than issuing as much as 25% of the company's shares to whoever you like, potentially diluting existing shareholders without compensation. Please don't put this up again next year.
Answer: Dreadful censorship from wrangler, waffle from chair but based on floor comments, sounds like it might have been voted down. And indeed it was defeated with 31.8% against. Watch video of exchange via Twitter.
Copyright © 2025 The Mayne Report. All rights reserved
