Ann: Replacement Notice of 2013 Annual General Me, page-6

re: Ann: Replacement Notice of 2013 Annual Ge... Hi Yellowcake,

I don't disagree with what you are saying.

I do not believe either way you have a guarantee that they are serving in your best interests. By law they should be but we have all see the reality of the situation.

There are certainly lots of juniors out there with board members holding large shares and performance is no better if not much worse than MEL.

My preference is for major shareholders not to have a majority at director level. If for instance there are 5 directors all up, maybe 2 out of the five can be major shareholders, then appoint the best MD you can source and a further 2 independents, 1 being the Chairman.

When it comes to GM's etc and resolutions that require shareholders to vote then then all shareholders, including major have an opportunity to raise and vote on resolutions etc.

I just do not think it is good corporate policy to have a group of directors that hold a majority and are not independent from each other.

If you don't agree that's fine but not many public companies boards would be set up this way.

Each to there own.

If you have experience in this area then you obviously know more than me :)

Nice drop today :)