I don't want to start another thread about the upcoming AGM in a fortnight, but for what they're worth, here are my thoughts on the ten resolutions on which we can vote.
Res 1 - Remuneration Report
It is interesting to note shareholder kickback occurring lately with a number of public companies. Examples are Woolworths, Whitehaven, Tabcorp, AMP, Treasury, Dexus, and APA.I expect Qantas to join the list. The reasons vary - sometimes financial performance, sometimes remuneration levels. while as with almost all of us, I'm disappointed with progress in getting signed deals, but as I review this last twelve months, I'm not in a position of knowledge to blame AnteoTech for that; we're aware that there is a lot of competition clamouring for attention, and winning attention and support at the technical level in due course must embrace the decision-makers. David Radford gives me the impression that he will be determined to identify and sit down with those decision-makers. Our quietly reserved but strong Chairman would expect that. So I'm giving the company the benefit of the doubt, and despite the SP halving over this last year, I'm working on the basis that this is a turnaround year. The announcements that have been made, the news flowing from conferences and the like, do indicate real traction. The latest news about the sale of $60k of AnteoX to a large EV manufacturer, is another indication of serious interest. Semi-retired posited a number of major companies as possibilities - well, take your pick, as it probably doesn't matter which one it is - it's a big one! And no doubt the company would be saying which one if it was allowed - but hey, if you were that EV manufacturer, wouldn't you want to keep that news quiet? In their position, I sure would.
I'll discuss remuneration issues below, but I'm giving a tick on this first resolution, because it is my vote of confidence in the company's leadership at Board and management level, and as ever, at the R & D level.
Resolution 2 - re-election of Glenda McLoughlin and Katherine Woodthorpe
I'm absolutely supporting this. Both bring considerable experience, enthusiasm and clear heads, are quite strong personalities, and I am assuming therefore each contributes most usefully to Board discussions and decisions. Interestingly, I note that Katherine is not holding shares (only unexercised options), and I assume she is deliberately avoiding conflicts of interest. Given her roles and influence in the field of "green energy", it seems to me she is deliberately ensuring that no conflict arises. If that is her primary reason, then I applaud her stance.
Resolution 3 - Short-term incentive Performance Rights to the MD/CEO
As our current CEO is also on the Board, as shareholders we are able to vote on the issue of such rights, be they "performance" or not. Where the CEO is not on the Board, such a matter is the prerogative of the Board. Posters will remember the last case, and the questions raised on this forum. Now while the rights can be granted through this resolution, They will vest only according to performance: "the number of Performance Rights that will vest will correspond with the percentage between 0-100 of the Boards assessment of the KPIs Mr Radford has achieved during the financial year to 30 June 2024. The assessment will be made during July and August 2024 and the Performance
Rights will vest immediately following a Board resolution of percentage of KPIs achieved for the year." (p.13 of the AGM Notice).
So I'm supporting this resolution. If the SP goes nowhere next year, then those performance rights won't be vested. And if the SP sky-rockets, well, good luck to David! He will have achieved what we have been looking for.
Resolution 4 - the Attaching Options
I was surprised that under the SPP, the directors while stumping up $30k each, couldn't receive the options that Placement and SPP shareholders could. So this is a "make-up" resolution, and it would be churlish of me not to support it.
Resolution 5 - Long term incentive options
This one has given me pause. Not over the other directors' and the Chair's incentives. So I've had a few discussions with other shareholders, and looked carefully at the supporting explanatory notes. 50% won't vest until November next year, and 50% after two years. After reflection, I've concluded that it is taking a long-term and carefully constructed approach, to ensure that the company's leadership at CEO and Board level, pushes on strongly. (We know it has long been the practice at AnteoTech to offer salaries plus options as financial compensation as well as incentive.) I note also that these options have to be paid for; sure, it will be peanuts if by next November the SP is 50 cents, but will it worry me that the exercise price will be 4.8 cents or a little bit over (shades of Ruth in "Pirates of Penzance" , only 46 years and a little bit over . . .).
So I have changed my mind and will support Res 5a (I had already decided to support 5b-e).
Resolution 6, 7, 8, and 9 - ratifying the Placement and SPP
Yes, of course. How the blazes do you undo something like that anyway?
Resolution 10
This is important. The Board already has discretion to offer up to 15% in any one year; 25% might be needed to get a big partner in. I'd be uite happy to have a smaller slice of a much larger pavlova.
So, them's me thorts. And a shout-out to Zabros 2020 - keep well ,mate.
Expand
