7 questions lodged at 2026 Mayne Pharma (MYX) hybrid AGM

Q1. A question for auditor Ben Lee from BDO and the CFO. Our latest accounts note we've got $1.04 billion in accumulated losses but still claim to have net assets of $370m, yet the current market cap is only $230m. However, the contributed capital is only $1.225 billion because we have $185m in reserves. What is the history of these reserves and did the latest audit process examine whether these should be eliminated from the accounts? What would have to happen for that to occur? And why did we only write down the intangibles from $545m to $528m over the 2024-25 financial year? Has the arguably excessive intangibles figure been closely examined in the current half year audit?

Answer: The only one of my 7 questions that was read out in full, although Tom Duthy broke it into two, separating out the reserves and intangibles components, which was fair enough. CFO Aaron Gray didn't know what made up the $185m in “reserves” but suspected it was “the gross to net”, whatever that means. Watch video of exchange via Twitter, plus this detailed explanation by the CFO of the intangibles assessment, which auditor Ben Lee backed up but couldn't hear online as he didn't use the microphone.

Q2. Why did chair Frank Condella resign with immediate effect two weeks before the AGM? Did he not want to front this meeting? Also, is new chair Prof Bruce Robinson likely to be seeking another 3 year term when his current term expires in 2028 or will a total of 14 years on the board be enough at that point? We've gone from a 71 year old chair to a 69 year old chair who would ordinarily be retiring soon after a long period on the board? Is the new chair a stop-gap measure after a failed takeover or the long term leadership solution for our company? If so, is he going to reduce time spent on his private practice in Sydney to focus on this difficult job leading a company reliant on US sales and a big manufacturing facility in Adelaide?

Answer: The important question was dreadfully censored by question wrangler Tom Duthy, an investor relations consultant who has served as a public company chair at other bio-tech outfits over the years. The chair Bruce Robinson said Frank was exhausted after all the takeover drama and implied he was committed for the long term. Watch video of censored exchange via Twitter.

Q3. After all is said and done, what is the range of potential total transaction and litigation costs associated with the Cosette takeover, based on both potential outcomes from the appeal process? Also, how much cash have we spent so far on transaction and litigation costs? Are we still paying our investment bankers for ongoing work or is it all now down to legal costs? Is Minter Ellison charging us for the use of their offices today or are they making so much from all the litigation that they are prepared to throw this in for free?

Answer: Quite brazen censorship from question wrangler Tom Duthy who went for the old "look it up yourself in the accounts" response. We haven't had any accounts since August 2025. Chair Bruce Robinson did say financial adviser Jefferies was no longer getting paid and it is now largely down to the lawyers as they continue to assess all legal options. Watch video of censored exchange via Twitter.

Q4. What was the scale of arbitrage or hedge fund activity on our share register during the takeover? Were any of them helpful regarding lobbying FIRB and the public debate in terms of trying to persuade the Treasurer to approve the deal? Have they all largely sold out now? How much change has there been to the share register over the past 12 months?

Answer: Out-sourced investor relations consultant turned question wrangler Tom Duthy did both the reading/editing and answering to start with on this one, but much of it was "look it up on the ASX or in the top 20 yourself". There hasn't been a top 20 since last August, Tom! He did say there had been significant turnover on the register and chair Bruce Robinson said they did not know who was behind the various media reports attempting to pressure Treasurer Jim Chalmers, which was a bit strange given an outfit called Harvest Lane Asset Management was openly named in this Street Talk item. This Chanticleer column last October was particularly strong. Watch video of exchange via Twitter.

Q5. What is the current shareholder approved fee cap for directors and how much are we expecting to save by moving to a smaller 5 person board next month? Will we be using the additional headroom to accommodate exertion payments to any directors in 2025-26 for all the additional work they took on during the ongoing takeover and litigation process? Also, is the new chair being paid the same amount as the former chair?

Answer: More dreadful censorship, albeit from general counsel and company secretary Laura Loftus this time. She and Tom did the question wrangling tag team. Laura responded that the fee cap is $1.8m and the chair said he is being paid the same, but the exertion payments component was never addressed so suspect they might be intending to do this, as occurred at both Wisetech and Capitol Health last year. Watch video of censored exchange via Twitter.

Q6. Which of the proxy advisers covered us this year and did any recommend a vote against any of today's resolutions, including this LTI grant? If so, what reasons did they give and did this translate into any material protest votes? Please don't say they are confidential. It is standard for companies to be across this detail on the voting recommendations and inform shareholders where relevant. Also, next year could you please disclose the proxies earlier to the ASX along with the formal addresses as many companies now do to allow for a more fully informed debate?

Answer: Hopeless question censorship from Mayne Pharma General Counsel Laura Loftus on the proxy advisers. Asked if there were any material protests but never got an explanation for the 22% remuneration protest vote because they claimed everyone was in favour of everything. Ironic indeed that the request for earlier disclosure next year to allow for a more fully informed debate was never read out. Poor form also that the proxy votes were disclosed after debate on each item had finished. Watch video of censored exchange via Twitter.

Q7. Thank you to Pat Blake for his 7 years of service on the board, which ends next month. It is always helpful for investors to have access to some exit perspectives from long serving independent directors. In his final public contribution as a Mayne Pharma director, could Pat please comment on what he regards as the best 2 decisions Mayne Pharma's board made during his time on the board and does he have any regrets?

Answer: Not asked because they never returned to general questions at the end of the 1 hour meeting, which only had 1 question from the floor and about 15 online, although they never named the online shareholders so you couldn't tell how many different shareholders were involved.

Copyright © 2026 The Mayne Report. All rights reserved

• share
  Share
  • 
    Facebook
  • 
    Twitter
  • email
    Email
  • print
    Print
  • link
    Copy Link
  • cancel
    Cancel