Ann: General Meeting Resolutions - Update , page-6

The other view point.

How many resolutions are pulled after votes have been received and trends have been digested from within a board ?

Well lets just concern ourselves with the civilized western world when we attempt to envisage this concept.


Seems that perhaps much is not quite right with the 'dream team'?

Dream team V Dream time V inconsistencies V perceived 'shareholder' value,,

Perceived by whom ? Certainly not ALL shareholders.

The announcement actually says as much.

Nowhere does it state ''All'' shareholders with regards to strategy.

Remember gents, All share holders are who you work for, and a majority of 51% is all that is needed to be considered in the '' best interests of ALL share holders'' 3 or 4% is not 51%


When in doubt,,,, in a truly democratic publicly listed environment,, you let the share holders vote don't you ???


IF,,,,, the real and actual reason for the withdrawal of resolution 2 is ,,'as the board have stated' ;

''Resolution 2 will be withdrawn ( specifics of placement) as not being in the interests of shareholders to proceed with this placement following the substantial rise in the Company's share price''

Note, ''in the interests of shareholders'' implies legally more than one shareholder but not ''ALL' shareholders.

Very cunning wording me thinks.

IF, the real and actual reasons behind this statement are not meant to create ambiguity,,,,,,and there is not more to this than meets the eye,,;

THEN,,,,, why have all the other resolutions remained ?

This poorly contrived ( perceived ) knee jerk reaction would have to be based upon , in part,, returned voting slips and an obvious trend therin ??

This in itself creates a corporate conundrum.

Cronyism ? Abrigation ? maipulation ? arrogence ?

Heads may fly and tail may roll,,, but there is an AGM looming which requires ALL share holders to vote for just whom they think is capable of taking this Co to the next chapter.

How will this reflect with regards to how a CSI really perceives the board ? I do mean,, the whole board ?

Best we now get real and open gentlemen.

IN REALITY;

None of the resolutions are within 20% 50% or even 100% of the current weekly VWAP.

THIS ANNS SETS A DANGEROUS PRECEDENT FOR THE REMOVAL OF ALL RESOLUTIONS imlo and my .h.o. thus creating a potential that would see the bad ol' days return,,, nearly get a deal,,, then no consummation ,,, been there how many times so far ?

Why ?

The past was controlled by mindsets more aligned to private Co milk machines.

Academic minds, strategic minds, analyitical minds, understand and articulate with foresight based upon insight.

Vocational minds have more of a hunter gatherer cloistered perception of the future.


SURELY resolution 3 in particular is of the exact ilk sp perspective wise,,, but yet it remains ?

Who will get looked after in res 3 ???

He's actually been named in the resolution !

What about all the other resolutions that are absolutely nowhere near,,, '' the Company's share price''

I fear some have forgotten that the board works for all shareholders and that share holders have a right to align with and for a potential majority ruling on all things that a mojority see as share holder value.

I fear that the undertaking to remove resolution 2 sets a legal precedent to call for ALL the resolutions to be now considered potentially null and void.

Just my thoughts of course, but worthy of consideration.

Wisdom,, after all may be considered the ability to entertain and consider all concepts without necesarily believing in all or any of them personally.

Serenity, courage, wisdom.

R D