Ann: AGM - Chairman address and CEO presentation, page-47

I did attend yesterday AB. I sat at the back so that I could easily see who and what was being said. It was a full house, quite noisy and disruptive, and the atmosphere was certainly not convivial. However, judging from the rabble around me I suspect that a good few attendees were there just for the tea and scones, and another few were hoping for some free handouts of Vivagel and DEP Docetaxel for the bathroom cabinet, just in case.

Management were obviously braced for a hard question time and I think it affected the whole afternoons proceedings. The presentations, if you are a close follower of SPL, had only a few new points of interest, and to me it all seemed to be a bit tired and jaded.

Jackie did get a couple of early punches in by highlighting that 41% of shareholders are retail investors and that the share price had performed well in excess of the ASX300. But to no avail! When the question time bell rang the gloves were off - the extent of shareholder frustration against management was evident, and management were equally cross and frustrated with the SH's

So yes, management were defensive, even petulant. And yes, investors were disappointed, frustrated and worried. Analysta made a good effort at voicing SH's concerns and I was surprised and disappointed with Jackie and Rob's response. If they had been a little more sympathetic to these concerns (even if they didn't really mean it) then we might have been able to move on to some other more positive topics.

However, I do think they have got the message that they need to communicate with the retail SH's better in future. After all, 41% is a high percentage of investors - and a 93% vote for JF's remuneration was low enough to reinforce that message. Hopefully management are also now recognising that private investors can be more of a problem than dealing with the insto's.

I must commend ajk92's summary. He flew down especially, asked the right questions, was rewarded with good reliable answers, left Melbourne a happy man and wrote a great report. Thank you ajk92, you are obviously very knowledgeable in this field.

The rest of us now really need to be a bit more pragmatic, as Analysta suggests. I was cross with Jackie when she mentioned $280US (another carrot) for an alternative treatment to VG. Immediately people are doing the sums in their head to see how rich the company, and therefore themselves, will be. Just let it be. They are working hard. They will be very successful. We will all be financially rewarded for doing very little.

Sorry AB, nothing new from me about AZ phase 1, but I have already said that SPL must maintain their internal programs as a priority. What Pascal is up to is well outside Jackie's control.

I did ask about the 54% rise in staff costs projected for this quarter, as shown in the quarterly cash report. This appears to be a one off, as it includes staff bonuses. I suspect it also makes provision for a mega Christmas party too!
Finally, I did mention TO's, to which I received the usual guarded replies about maximising shareholder value and that perhaps in the future it may happen. I reminded them that it was Jackie who initially raised the subject two years ago at the AGM, to which I received mumbled but embarrassed platitudes. Bottom line is, it is not going to happen any time soon. Thank goodness, say I!