@Gymjunky"You don't know what you're talking about, your naive it's common knowledge." It might be common knowledge on this forum but not in the real world.
"Directors' remuneration is often linked to share price performance as part of their incentive packages." True. That certainly does not mean they have complete control over what happens in the stock market.
I agree with the rest of your diatribe.
This is what you originally wrote "The remuneration is and should be based on share price performance nothing else."
So to debunk your emotional comment.
Fitzroy and Wary have gone into great detail as to how the price of this stock( and many others) is manipulated. How is that managements fault?
Gold stocks world wide ( bar a couple) have not kept pace with the pace of golds rise. How is that managements fault?
The Thai govt closed down this mine. Explain to me how this was managements fault
Since then the govt has allow the mine to reopen. I assume you do not think this had anything to do with management. Just pure luck.
Did the original management quit the moment that the mine was shut or did they hang in to try to get the mine reopened. I assume you think they should do this for free rather than jump ship to another prospect.
You are one of many on this forum who are just p....ed that the share price did not do what you thought it should do in the time frame you thought it should and you want to blame someone.
One last point. If what you say is true why did the remuneration package get passed? Surely the big investors would have voted no if you knew what you are talking about.
(20min delay)