Australia's largest stock trading and investment forum Australia's #1 stock forum

ADO

Click for more information

0.00%

2.2¢ anteotech ltd

New Captains of ADO, page-163

First 163 Last

Share
Profile

Follow
bourbasted

1,890 Posts.

278

13/11/17

12:45

Post #: 28735442
Share
Originally posted by dolcevita ↑

...
We found ourselves in a state of emergency but this must have been caused by overreach much earlier on. This has a cascading effect; a series of badly thought out, desperate measures, including the funding debacles were the result, but the cause is somehow overlooked in the ongoing goodies vs baddies narrative here in social media.

Repeat: This shouldn’t be about who we like on a personality level.

As for responsibilities, I can’t see how Mark Bouris was ever actively engaged in securing funding for ADO, let alone closely looking at the risks involved in the business model. People say we shouldn’t have an overseas based Chairman, but I can’t see any advantage in the Australia-based one that MB embodied.

As far as I can ascertain from the anns, the current Chairman was only put in the job on a transitional basis when Mark Bouris unexpectedly left (nothing will make me ungrateful for that blessed result, btw).

Meanwhile a sharp contrast can be made between them. Mark Bouris who quite obviously was not expending any appreciable time on ADO, nor offering his considerable financial acumen and networking acumen, needed to be part of the solution. I cannot see that he ever was. He had some supporters in here, but they’ve all moved on.

Does anyone imagine the current Chairman and CFO haven't expended a lot of energy to sort this debacle out, remember a buyer for Diasource had to be found and negotiated with? Consultation with business experts has occurred and now at least we have a realistic plan to move forward AND it includes overdue concepts of caution and risk management. If Joe Maeji seems to like it, I’m on the side of the future and the people who are behind it.

The science with batteries is apparently going to take off, although with 1.6 bill in shares issued, we will be in for more punishment as a capital raising seems inevitable. Nobody should assume because I mention the latter that I’m remotely happy with this state of affairs.

Far from it. It’s a disgrace but the causes are from a long time back. Surely we should all be thinking very clearly and impartially about them in a sequential way. Concepts like taking responsibility also shouldn’t be far from anyone’s mind. The inevitable consolidation would be preferable on a rising SP, not before. Hopefully we can get some upwards SP movement going from the battery consultancy outcomes.

On the box ticking, (which is in fact a valid summary of credentials and experience) I wonder how a purported inVESTor but in reality, often a trader who has openly ramped the stock on a social media and not always disclosed their trades*, qualifies. Others have been dismissive about ticking the boxes, but there is substance required for a tick and Matt Sanderson has very few.

*Absence of disclosure is frequently part of the social media deal, granted ....but is it Director material? There is undeniable personal popularity involved, but this is about demonstrated competence, accountability and transparency, surely?

Sanderson may indeed be capable of being a highly effective and responsible and transparent office holder, I don’t argue this is possible. However I have had my doubts.

Let me be clear. Long-term investors have been decimated by traders, and by dilution which will be inevitably crystallised in a consolidation; the number of shares on issue is untenable. Nothing will make me grateful for these realities as a long-term investor. But I do accept them certainly.

I hear Sanderson helped bail out ADO from personal funds. That’s impressive but was he alone in that, or is he the only one talking about it? Were there any directors who worked without pay? You’d have to ask them. I question the goodies vs baddies narrative that’s been going on.

Further, I hope he wasn’t using funds from trading ADO, oh the irony! Some of we long term holders have made distress sales.

I make this digression to point out just how robust you have to be in this murky environment, to set aside personal feelings of loyalty, like and dislike and look at the realities of how much we know, or do not know and apply relevant standards equally.

Do I think Geoff Cummings should ever be CEO again? Certainly not! Apparently he doesn't think so either. There is no mea culpa apart from that.

In relation to Rolf Sickman, anyone who has succeeded in his industries must have at least tough opportunism as a defining quality. I asked in the live presentation why as a Diasource office holder, he remains on the board post Diasource sale. The answer from the Chairman was anodyne.

Again it has made me think about motivations. Maybe Sickman is simply taking advantage of a situation he cannot believe presents itself. As Kerry Packer so astutely observed: “you only get one Alan Bond in your life and I’ve had mine!”

Ask yourself, whose fault is that?
Obviously Sickman is convinced of the science and he sees it as a colossal opportunity. Why wouldn’t he want to remain ‘on board’ literally and figuratively?
Let me be clear: I trust Sickman as much as I do Matt Sanderson, taking into account what I know of their past record and I trust them both enough to know they aren't slouches at recognising colossal opportunity. As Paul Keating says, “when in doubt about motivations, always back self-interest”.

Like a broker or trader who has enough of what he wants (9 million apparently), at this stage Sickman may simply have decided to let this run. If so, he will be motivated to promote the maximum returns.

Put another way, you cannot hold your own pragmatism/opportunism up as standard, and hate it in others. It’s illogical.

Meanwhile I’ve pointed out many months ago that the Chairman’s role with Ferghana partners is advisory on scientific proposals, I even posted the role description. There is no reason to assume that he cut the deal with Diasource for ADO just from his scientific advisory association with Ferghana. He didn’t have a commercial negotiating role from what I can see. He advised on science.

It’s the same as saying “Oh Matt Sanderson worked for Commonwealth Bank and so did ds. Therefore they must be working in concert on their trades”.
Guilt by association isn’t what works. Fear, fed by anger and frustration, isn’t necessarily going to line up with the facts is it?

I’m voting for stability because acting out of anger is unproductive.
Therefore I will be holding my nose and voting for Matt Sanderson, and indeed all the other incumbents.
I want a management team that fully understands that good governance is essential.
The Chairman’s presentation showed this. Being divided at this stage makes no sense.

How should we be “voting to back Geoff Cumming”? He’s not being re-elected. Bluntly put, and I do like the guy on a personal level, but I haven’t seen him taking responsibility at any stage for any of his part in the poor decision making.

Surely punishing people who were part of the rescue operation like the current CFO is a deeply undesirable. It’s bordering on perverse.

I will certainly be voting to retain the incumbent Financial Operating officer.
This is about capability and as far as I can ascertain he is part of the recovery operation.
Voting against him and Sickman to punish the Chairman, if that's what is going on, is a shoot yourself in the foot destabilising strategy IMO.

People have accused me in the past of having no commercial expertise because I wanted to threaten an EGM to get rid of R Martin which should have happened earlier. He would have walked then and no shots need have been fired. Yet the same people attacking me for instability and cluelessness would destabilise the board now and rid it of very hard-gained expertise. You cannot blame the CFO and Chairman for the tough decisions that were recently made without looking at what caused them to be necessary and what the other realistic options were. It’s bizarre.

However! I will also be voting down the remuneration package as a warning shot over the bows for the entire team to lift their game rather than anyone losing their jobs.

I do hope some people will have a rethink. The Shareholder’s Association of Australia has assured me that if we can get sufficient new members, they will form a watching brief over ADO, even though they usually don’t cover small caps. IMO this would be a measured and sensible approach.

Riverbrae, I do hope you recover soon. Chemo is a special form of hell. If nobody else has wished you well, presumably because you have raised inconvenient points it is a shame.

The stress from this mess is very bad for people’s health who have taken (what for them), is a large investment position. I wasn’t in a position to trade. Trading involves learned skills built up over time, and it’s more stress.

But my point is the double standards. Those who sneer at people like myself not nimble or ruthless enough to trade in the market, let alone give mixed signals in social media, cannot in the next breath express faith-based support for those in management who on solid analysis of how things must have developed, weren't adept and pragmatic enough in modern corporate life.

My own health has improved enough to be going to the AGM this year and obviously, to post again even though I thought I’d never be back. Happily, another stock of mine is revving up and it’s lifted my mood no end. I should go to that AGM instead which would be actual fun, but this one is at a turning point.
While I’m hoping for a breakout of commonsense, and social death awaits if it doesn’t, but who cares? I’m a truth seeker and I call it as I see it.

I have respect for the business approach which applies terms like “realistic”, in the Chairman’s address. Long overdue. It had a soporific effect on me when he read it out, but you have to respect the content and the strategy. I’ve met and worked with extremely able people who aren’t great spruikers. There has not been enough of this kind of applied management-science and strategy with ADO, IMO.

I haven’t spoken to Joe Maeji directly, I only asked the questions about the IP registration but I suspect he is probably relieved at the outbreak of common-sense and good management. I would imagine he is crying out for some certainty. Using the consultants is a colossal step forward, and smarter than having in-house help. They have the connections in the industry.

For God’s sake, let it continue. For this reason I vote for stability.

Batteries are apparently going to drive this stock if we can manage to get out of the way and demonstrate an ability to both learn from the past, and move forward. This is about timing and opportunity.

Interested to hear responses. I could be wrong, but this is my take on it after much deliberation.

dolce.

Expand

Hi Dolce! Firstly, welcome back to the board and I'm very happy to hear you are healthy. I wasn't aware that you were unwell (or Riverbrae for that matter) but glad to hear your both on the mend and wishing you continued good health. Whilst we may disagree on some things, I value your opinion and welcome the viewpoint you provide.

Your two posts were very well put together and thought out. This vote should be interesting and I can see arguments that are valid for each board member to stay or go.

I do agree with your stability sentiment, however, I cannot get my head around supporting Sickman. His association with DIASource would have me constantly questioning motivations and I simply think we can do better. This is just my opinion.

For those who question Matt's qualifications, I've had similar thoughts. I don't have any answers for this, but I will say Rolf's qualifications before chairing the Board of DIASource were in real estate, private equity and investment processes. I'm not sure how that qualifies him any more so than Matt, but that's for others to decide for themselves I suppose. I'll personally be voting to keep Matt in place to see what he can bring to the table. It's an interesting choice and a bit of a 'Captains Call' imho, but it doesn't mean it's a bad call. Time will tell.

Studly is a bit of a mystery for me. I think he has played a tough role that no one else was prepared to play and will take some heat as a result. That said, some of the staff moves that have taken place may see our OPEX spend level reduced and keep us in business a bit longer to focus on key areas of potential revenue and commercialization desperately needed. He brings a wealth of experience at the highest levels in multiple industries to include medical and technology. As you say, this is a gent who understands the need for governance. I'm not prepared to say goodbye to him just yet.

That's about all I have at the moment. Wishing all SH's the best.

All IMHO, FWIW, DYOR, MSDB, blah blah blah....
ADO Price at posting: 1.5¢ Sentiment: Hold Disclosure: Held
6 Upvote

0 Great analysis

Reply

Top Stories

SDF

Steadfast Group sees $600M wiped off on resumed trades after Four Corners feature

DUR

Duratec snags $76.5M in works from Woodside and Defence respectively - including spy network upgrade

FBR

FBR's robotic home construction tech passes first US early-stage structural compliance check

FRB

Firebird snaffles Environmental Permit for Jinshi plant

GL1

Global Lithium latest hit by lithium downturn; shares fall -10% as Manna DFS paused

There are more pages in this discussion • 13 more messages in this thread...

First 163 Last

Add ADO (ASX) to my watchlist

(20min delay)
Last 2.2¢		Change 0.000(0.00%)		Mkt cap ! $54.31M

Open	High	Low	Value	Volume
2.2¢	2.2¢	2.1¢	$734	33.69K

Buyers (Bids)

No.	Vol.	Price($)
2	678087	2.1¢

Sellers (Offers)

Price($)	Vol.	No.
2.2¢	174064	2

View Market Depth

No.	Vol.	Price($)
2	678087	0.021
7	313601	0.020
7	861397	0.019
7	2261668	0.018
4	190661	0.017

Price($)	Vol.	No.
0.022	174064	2
0.023	238083	3
0.024	1090300	2
0.025	1238770	10
0.026	45454	1

Last trade - 16.10pm 10/09/2024 (20 minute delay)

ADO (ASX) Chart