Should board members have intervened at the AGM?, page-11

As an investor in a company, you share responsibility for its reputation in the public eye and among current and future customers.

An annual general meeting is both an information event and a promotional platform.

I found the presentation at the beginning of the meeting excellent, as it presented the current status of the technology and a fascinating outlook on the future.

A lot of work and preparation time goes into a presentation like this, as it's meant to make the entire audience proud and enthusiastic about the company and its products.

The audience also includes customers and potential investors.

Unfortunately, the audience didn't engage with the presentation at all – this robbed the informational content of the presentation of a great deal of energy.

From the very beginning, there was an aggressive undertone in the audience, which disappointed me and certainly many others too.

As an investor, you often have unrealistic expectations and hope for a quick buck.

Anyone who has unrealistic expectations must be able to deal with the resulting disappointment and reflect on themselves.

Professionalism as an investor therefore also includes the personal disappointment (due to excessively high expectations) of not revealing one's anger at an annual general meeting.

Now, after the annual general meeting, everyone is disappointed with the annual general meeting – and we investors played a large part in that.

It would have been professional if someone in the audience had stopped the escalation – because as a listener and investor, you can also act as a moderator.

Perhaps some investors will consider this before the next annual general meeting.