EGM Interest, page-20

I'm actually opposed to an EGM and agree with what Gas said yesterday and I'll explain why as I know this will be a controversial view.

1) ASX Compliance: 4DS Memory requires 3 directors and 1 company secretary, with 2 of the directors living in Australia. So as a company we're only meeting the minimum requirements. Which means either Dave takes a back seat as a non-exec or we need to find someone to replace to replace him.

2) Following on from above, the CEO we need, we deserve is unlikely to be Australian and unfortunately Kurt, JD, Ken, and Wilbert didn't seem to have a lot of interest working through the various R&D issues to see thing through to completion. So before we get rid of anyone, its equally important to know who the replacement is going to be or we risk making things worse and hurting the company in the process.

3) Existing problems can be resolved by simply improving communication and transparency - actually communicating company strategy and goals, having some passion about what the company is trying to achieve. The lack of transparency on a company this small I see as a red flag. Think of silicon start ups, run by the founders of the company that are extremely passionate about the company and what they're doing and they're broadcasting to anyone that will listen about what they're doing. This shouldn't be that difficult to turn around for the existing team and again to point 2 - we don't know if a new person will resolve this very basic issue.

4) Removing Dave will require the other directors to step up and they seem to also be missing in action which could result in a directionless company.

What I do support though is an overhaul to the sales pool arrangement that ties to a number of KPIs which should incentivise improving point 3.