I agree, I think we all know the answer to this question. I like to look at how to fix problems, and I think it’s fair to say that the real problem isn’t just with UBS or with MR. I particularly don’t want to single out Rowsthorn, -the poor human has blown 500 million (or so I read), and if I was him, I’d be doing everything possible (to the letter of the law) to hang on to the rest. The real problem is that we have a regulator that allows this obvious potential collusion. Or should I say, we don’t have a regulator, and that allows this sort of potential collusion. What has gone wrong with this sorry mess, which appropriate regulations could have controlled? - Extreme shareholder dilution. - Share raising not pro-rata. (even the last 100 mil isn’t pro-rata, -greatly favouring the very small investor) - Prohibit non-renounceable cap raising (as in UK). - Perhaps a publicly listed company should have a limit of the ratio of tangible assets to debt –and the share price fall may have been prevented. - “Separation of powers” and independent review between personal financing of the board, and financing of the public company. (In this Asciano case, shareholders will always wonder if the terms of the cap raising, were influenced by the offer of personal financing to the CEO and largest single shareholder.) - “Poison Pill” legislation. Regarding the outcome of a future resolution: A company should not be able to agree to a payment to an entity (who would otherwise benefit from a positive future vote), if the outcome of that vote is negative (heads I win, tails you lose. Thoughts?
John S.
AIO Price at posting:
$1.36 Sentiment: Hold Disclosure: Held
