portman response to egm notice, page-31

Given I've been right on all corporate related issues thus far it is of interest to note that a dismissive comment is all you can provide. I am well aware of the implications of having a PMM chairman.

The other non-PMM directors still have FAS share votes behind them and can still call for votes on issues of contention that would concern all shareholders.

What this will avoid is a fully FAS aligned board making all sorts of unchecked decisions at the expense of ordinary shareholders.

PMM 3 votes vs FAS 2 votes = infinitely better than FAS 5 votes.

Also I would be highly sceptical that the PMM board would jeopardise their reputations and mothball a company they had only 20% holding of. It's pretty clear that reputations matter little to the current directors as this is their last ditch attempt to maintain a corporate position of significance.