@ipv6ready apologies for the tag
Few stakeholders? Define a few?
~ here is a little hint (little being the operative word) 180 shareholders have contributed funds to support the Shareholders Action Group
~ think of that 180 and apply a multiple (whole number greater than 1) to the individual emails received.
I think you are underestimating this to be just a venting exercise .. .. it might be more strategic than meets the eye
~ you are also assuming that shareholders that have accounts with the above funds haven't taken proactive measures to vote?
~ you are assuming that shareholders that have holdings in super accounts haven't taken proactive measures to ensure having a vote?
Do I think the proposed directors will get elected, or a combination of proposed and incumbent directors?
~ no idea but it sure looks like the incumbent board are getting a little worried? (and they are privy to early poll numbers
)
~ if we had little or no chance, why would they be bothering calling around to large shareholders soliciting votes or seeking a change of vote as late as yesterday? or engaging Computershare third party vote solicitation company to start calling shareholders starting last week?
** I am a bit peeved that they haven't called me though lol.
** with the Board now wanting to engage rather than filtering any communication through Citadel - Magnus they are;
-- making personal calls to select shareholders
-- reminding shareholders to vote, and if they already have, trying to coax them to change their minds
-- rushed out an announcement after the reminder announcement on "some" of the ongoing problems with the Government in an attempt to (IMO) appear to be all concerning and wanting to keep shareholders informed.
** seriously, we would more than likely not be in this position (249D) if this had have been an ongoing standard versus (IMO) one of desperation.
Don't under estimate the little guys in all this, it might take 20 mum and dad investors combined holdings to negate a larger holder vote, but there are a lot of mum and dad retail investors that are not happy .. . just saying'
But at the end of the day, regardless of the outcome it sure has made the incumbent board actually do something, pity
IMO it is only for self interest or survival.
cheers
~ the highest participation for FFX voting was for the demerger @ 46.74% where 552M of the SOI was voted, the amount of shares voted by all these nominee account funds basically won't change, what can change is them pesky little mum and dad retail shareholders participating to vote.
~ the voting at the AGM was obvious on how many VanEck & State Street shares get voted, when the numbers indicated (IMO) that these two were not happy with the Company's performance -- hence the Renumeration Report not being carried. Their vote (IMO) switched to supporting the re-election of Gordon, with the latest announcements and the flagged delays in getting the purported "Corporate Transaction" completed any time soon as the suggested time lines are getting pushed further out -- they just may crack another hissy as this ongoing saga looks headed way passed the 4th Quarter (if the Company make an announcement as advised by the end of September)
~ the Corporate Transaction will be delayed because of the Mali Government issues, when those finalised, if the Corporate Transaction is via a SOA, that takes approximately 120 days -- this will put Treadstone Resource Partners on a trajectory of being engaged by Firefinch for over 12 months?
** wasn't in a acceptable time mentioned somewhere?
~ will there be able to be a SOA started before the shareholders vote on the outcome of the disposal of Morila SA?
