Ann: The Annual General Meeting, page-68

Yes there was a response and I'm not going to post it but if he had asked me to explain I might have told him that he lost me on a few counts

• Suggesting to me that I didn't know what I was talking about without checking what experience I might have had or why I felt the way I had
• Responding to my aside about the moelis report by saying "with respect, the report is written by a CFA and is published by a leading institutional broker. ". Which I thought was an interesting response because that report effectively said that AJX had less potential Value (in the relatively short term) than it had in March of this year
• Adopting a dismissive tone even if he did not realise that was how it came across
• Being exceedingly defensive about his role and yet in the process diminishing Nick's contribution . "the Executive Chairman has a more outward facing and long term view role, although working closely with the CEO on day to day matters. The CEO is more operations and sales focussed." (I remain of the view that the strategic input comes from nick)

It was interesting to watch the performance. But, as I said, in the end I think Nick is effective enough and strong enough to deliver and the rest doesn't matter even if we think we may not currently getting real value for money from all the players. Enough votes were given to say we are off the mark on that and so moving on makes sense

Parsifal