Share
148 Posts.
lightbulb Created with Sketch. 10
clock Created with Sketch. 17/04/19
14:28
Share
Originally posted by Retired123:
↑
After looking at this company it looks just like a passive investor in other predominantly listed companies - main are Harvest One and Lab that account for around 70% of assets. Now management has been outsourced so why are there so many hanger-ons pulling salaries and fees. Doesn't make any sense. Maybe a CFO/secretary and a few clerical staff. The directors and senior management have large performance options at exercise prices mostly below the the NTA backing. Seems a bit generous. If management is now outsourced why should directors and management be given generous performance incentives when they have no involvement in ongoing management. Isn't that the whole basis of performance options? Doesn't make sense to me really or am I missing something? Also there were some pretty generous "share based payments" in 2018 to directors (eg Chairman Wall got $2,125,000 as did Andreas Gedeon as CEO) via Harvest One not MMJ which seems odd. Wall is a full time partner of a legal firm that would be fairly demanding of his time so his remuneration as a director of MMJ seems quite generous. Or have I missed something? I've invested some play money in this in the hope that the SP gets up closer to the NTA PER SHARE however the NTA PER SHARE will be diluted after all the performance options are exercised. And if the options are exercised (assuming the SP is higher than exercise price) then those lucky holders may be keen to sell. On th plus side directors have some skin in the game but where did that skin (shares) come from? Free shares from the company?
Expand
I'd be happy if we just got them to sell all the investments, gave us our profit and shut the company down. That way we get close to 100% upside which is pretty good. Then we can put the profit into Harvest One Medipharm Labs or another company we like in the space.
