U Coming to WA, page-196

@lucasfund @Bollocks2

I think it's even worse than that.

I have just read the 17 Jan Scoping study refresh announcement. I've read it again, and again.

Now I believe that management has ZERO interest in actually turning this into a mine.

I feel that they are bullshitting me.

It's the paragraph about their ability to get an extension. In this same paragraph they then go and make that pointless, by raising yet another barrier...they add that they would now have to rehash the entire approvals process because the scoping study is being rehashed.

It's never ending, circular garbage on repeat, is how it looks to me.

Why go through the hard work of actually developing a uranium mine, especially as they don't have the skillset to do this, when they can just sit back, stall the project indefinitely, and continue riding the gravy train? Year, after year, after year...

My only question is, what the hell are the shareholders doing? Why have they not used hotcopper & twitter to organise? Why are they allowing this Executive Chairman and his team to stay? At the very least the shareholders on here, should've voted against their annual remuneration! As a new holder, that is what I am advocating, and how I will vote.

If it happens twice (at >25% against), then it triggers a board spill.

Do it once, and it will put them on notice, instantly.

-------------------
What is the TWO STRIKE rule for remuneration?

The rule means that boards face being SPILLED if they suffer shareholder votes of more than 25% against their executive pay proposals at two consecutive company annual general meetings.
---------------------