4 questions lodged at 2026 Truscreen (TRU) hybrid AGM

Q1. What led to our decision to move on from RSM Hayes as our auditor? Did we run a competitive tender for the job and, if so, how many firms tendered? Vinay Sheoran, a partner at Hall Chadwick NSW, is the new proposed the audit signing partner. Why is our auditor based in Sydney when the previous audit was run out of Auckland?

Answer: The chair admitted that he pre-empted this question so none of it was read out and the tender process element was never even covered in the pre-emptive comments about the move to a Sydney-based auditor. Poor. Watch video of exchange via Twitter.

Q2. Well done for offering shareholders a renounceable pro-rata structure with the recent raise but it was also twinned with an institutional placement which diluted retail shareholders as a whole. Will you offer retail shareholders a stand alone share purchase plan on the same terms as the recent placement before next year's AGM to make up for the dilution caused by the recent big end of town placement which was only available for sophisticated institutional investors?

Answer: The Truscreen question wrangler edited down a number of my questions, including this one. Doesn't sound like we'll be getting a make good SPP any time soon. Watch video of exchange via Twitter.

Q3. The latest accounts show we've got accumulated losses of $39.7m and net assets of just $2.6m so shareholders are down around $30m given that the market cap is currently $12.6m. As a relatively new shareholder, could the chair briefly summarise where all the shareholder funds went. If he had his time again, what does he believe current and former directors of this company should have done differently to deliver a better experience for shareholders? If the chair doesn't know, could the person on the call with the best understanding of our corporate history please be invited to comment?

Answer: The Truscreen chair Tony Ho is very long winded whilst his question wrangler shortened my already quite short questions. Therefore, “how did we lose $30m?” turned into 5 minutes of discussion. Watch video of how exchange started via Twitter, plus these additional comments where the Truscreen brass said it was their auditor who forced a $10m provision on their IP to be booked during COVID and this could be reversed as it was only a provision.
Q4. There were material double digit protest votes against some of the remuneration related resolutions at last month's EGM. Has this been repeated today on this board fee cap resolution and could the chair please summarise what is so contentious about our incentive programs for the board and KMP? Also, given this history of shareholder concern, why not put up an Australian-style remuneration report resolution for the vote at next year's AGM, particularly given that we are dual listed on the ASX?

Answer: The Truscreen chair rejected this request after the question was badly butchered and this was particularly disappointing given that there was a 25% protest vote on the lift in the director fee cap. 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