Voting, page-39

Thanks for your help hayashi.
There's 700k votes AGAINST all items except the election of Greg Smith.

This share loan is the first major red flag for me, despite where others have raised their own red flags in the past this is mine. I'm always an open book and as such am happy to listen to reasoning why the share loan is necessary and why Mike did not take a pay cut this year despite redundancies.

Fundamentally I still believe there is nothing wrong with the company, it's IP or the path chosen re WaaS but it concerns me that the pivacs have chosen this avenue with the share loan rather than linking them to contract related milestones(particularly Mike). I also find it disappointing that Mike was comfortable to cut jobs but not his own salary during covid. Ultimately, this shows poor leadership qualities to me.
Not making it personal but the exact same thing happened to my mum working for telstra in the naughties when the CEO's bonus went ahead but my mum (a low tier team leader) got sacked without thanks after 12 years with the company, not using 1 sick day her entire career there.

I believe a spill could be a good avenue to have a wake up call for all board members; re-elected or replaced in order to get some fresh perspective on the immediate direction of the company. If grellman is not willing to direct Mike to more honest avenues of share collection then he needs a reality check as much as Mike himself.

Mike, if you're paying attention to this thread feel free to publicly address the issues raised regarding your wage, currently on par with companies that are making tangible returns and outline exactly what reasoning you and Mark used to come up with the share loans and why this is necessary. I'm all ears, unbiased and willing to change my 700k votes in your favour should I see fit your response.