5 questions lodged at 2026 Challenger Gold (CEL) hybrid AGM

Q1. Could both Challenger Gold candidates up for election, Carolina Zang and Fletcher Quinn, please summarise their capital raising record as public company directors. How many stand alone placements have they done which weren't accompanied by a share purchase plan and how many SPPs have they delivered to retail shareholders across their board careers? What is there overall attitude to fair treatment of retail shareholders in capital raisings?

Answer: The chair Knauer explained that Carolina has only been on the board for 12 months and is based in Argentina. And having done one SPP during her time on the board, it's all good. He then went on to say that doing an SPP every time they did a placement could be cumbersome and onerous. Fletcher Quinn was a little more supportive and followed his chair in referencing a previous SPP at 4c which is well in the money with the stock now at 13c. It was actually 4.5c and if you go back and look at that October 2024 deal, there was a $6.6m private placement and they initially planned to cap the SPP at just $1m. But when $7.8m came through the door, they scaled it back to $4 million and returned $3.8m to retail shareholders, which is another example of poor treatment. Watch video of exchange via Twitter.

Q2. Why are you refreshing the placement capacity? Doesn't this just suggest you'll do yet another placement? If you do, will retail shareholders be offered an SPP this time as we've been diluted on multiple occasions by placements with no SPP?

Answer: If Challenger Gold is fully funded after a flurry of placements, still don't know why they refreshed their placement capacity at today's AGM? Flexibility and all that. Chair Kris Knauer offered a “best efforts endeavour” to include an SPP with the next placement, although it's not clear if this binds the incoming chair. Watch video of exchange via Twitter.

Q3. Who provided the legal advice that it was okay to severely censor my platform set out in the nomination letter sent to the board and why was my candidacy relegated to the very bottom of the agenda at item 11, when the two incumbent directors Carolina Zang and Fletcher Quinn were up the top as items 2 and 3 respectively? Have any of our directors had experience of overseeing contested public company board elections before and could the chair outline his approach to fairness between candidates?

Answer: Was surprised chair Kris Knauer had to clarify with Kelly Moore from Automic, who was handling the questions, as to who had asked this question. The chair then complained I didn't “pick up the phone”, something he never did either. It was Perth outfit Steinepress which gave the legal advice which the chair admitted included that they could have rejected the nomination as invalid, something the board opted not to do. Instead, they played hardball on my board nomination (platform censorship etc). Watch video of part one of exchange via Twitter, plus watch part two where he admits none of the directors had any experience managing a contested board election. They'll be better directors for the work-out.

Q4. After holding a physical AGM last year, why did we shift to holding a virtual AGM this year when hybrid AGMs incorporating both formats is the established best practice which maximise shareholder participation and board accountability. Having shown you can deliver both formats over the past 2 years, will you hold a hybrid AGM next year? Our share registry provide Automic has a good facility in Sydney to accommodate the physical component and their online platform is excellent.

Answer: After moving from a dinosaur physical AGM last year to a virtual this year (the normal Sydney venue somehow wasn't available) outgoing Challenger Gold chair Kris Knauer reckons they might just do a best practice hybrid next year. Not on the last possible day, please! Watch video of exchange via Twitter.

Q5. Why do we always hold our AGM on the last possible day in May for companies with December 31 balance dates? The last day is a notorious hang out for disorganised or loss-making companies seeking to avoid scrutiny. There are 46 public company AGMs today, the most on any day so far this year. Given that we have grown to be a $300m market cap company, will you undertake to avoid holding last possible day AGMs in future years?

Answer: After earlier question editing, Automic question wrangler Kelly Moore did well to read this forcefully put question in full. Chair Kris Knauer reckons the poor directors, who have got 5 months to hold an AGM, have to juggle their busy schedules in multiple jurisdictions. What about the poor Australian shareholders asked to juggle 46 public company AGMs on the same day? It's just pathetic to go for the last possible day year after year as Challenger does. Watch video of exchange via Twitter.

Copyright © 2026 The Mayne Report. All rights reserved

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