major shareholder, page-18

Recoop,

I do not consider myself more right than wrong atm, however I do try to provide some explanatory basis for my viewpoint (right or wrong, and whether I later change it or not).

It's hard to be the judge of what overpaid is so I am not going to take flak on this ocassion for expressing an opinion on it, but clearly reward on the skin they have in the game is not part of directors remuneration. They are as entittled to divi's on their equity as you or I.

As to " The dividends have not been all from retained earnings. If they were, they might have paid some tax perhaps and they would be franked maybe."

The IPM profit is not on Australian operations, and that is the reason the divi's are not franked, and never will be.

Also you need to read the accounts to see that retained profits more than cover the divi's, but that surplus was not sufficient to also cover the californian investments, hence a small one-off (so far) capital raising. Incidentally they have paid several times the equivalent of that raising in divi's so far.

EL