agm resolutions

Res 1 - If more than 25% vote against the adoption of the remuneration report as happened last year, there will be a board spill.

Res 2 - Re-election of Han as a Director. Maybe the company should say why Han is a Director in the first place and what benefit he is for the shareholders. Other than grabbing 5% of PDY during the "falling out", what entitles him to a seat at the table. He seems to be only around for the few meetings each year. Time for an explanation imo.

Res 3 - Re-election of Quinn. I'm not happy that he was picking up a salary for months whilst still running AGU. Getting paid twice to do one job rather poorly from what I can see. Not worth $336kpa, but then neither is Stokes. $7k per week? Far too much for what they actually achieve. They can't claim the IP as theirs, as we are paying Saunders to do that job.

Res 4 - Approval of an Option Plan. Why? Issue up to 15% of the company to who? How many employees do we have?. I won't vote for this, enough dilution already. Seems like it isn't needed atm and may encourage the directors to issue unwarranted options to those who don't deserve them.

Res 5&6 - 40m shares each to Stokes and Quinn in lieu of salary. Sounds ok, saving PDY cash to give them shares.
The trouble I see is firstly they say 40m each and mention $200k saving on each salary, so that's .5c per share. But then it says the issue price is the day of the AGM, which means if the sp is .4c then they either get 50m each or it only reduces their salaries by $160k each,
Secondly, whether it's .4 or .5, they are happy to give up their cash now. Why didn't they choose to do this say last year when the sp was much higher?. I'd rather be spiteful and give them the cash and say to them to try buying 80m shares on market. Maybe this will help get rid of some of the merger overhang.

Res 7&8 - 25m Options each to Stokes and Quinn. Yep, fill your boots boys. Pay 2c per option to convert them later on. I have no problem with this at all.

Res 9 - Board Spill. If 25% of shareholders vote against Res 1 there will be a spill of the board and another meeting. Those directors who are forced to stand down will nominate again so not much to be gained I wouldn't think.

Conclusion - I don't believe the directors have performed adequately over the last year and therefore should forgo part of their salaries as a show of solidarity with the shareholders who have suffered by their constant delays in acheiving anything. That would indicate they were determined to rein in costs and run a tight ship until things improved. They achieved very little of real value so therefore should be paid accordingly. I would be very happy to more than compensate them if they turn the company's fortune around. But not before. Therefore have the options and get the sp up well above 2c.

All just my opinion