AGM Resolutions, page-36

Whilst I would prefer to see a much greater holding by Directors I am not against the proposed issue of shares under the PSP. I know around a $300k pa salary sounds good but in reality its not that large for the position held.
It is pointless having KPIs' that are to hard/impossible to meet. A quick look at the KPIs' shows that if they are all met and hopefully exceeded then we will likely all make money - including the Directors in receipt of shares under the PSP. It therefore becomes an incentive to do even better.
I do not begrudge the Directors making money from PSP shares if it makes me money as well.
I would not be surprised if most KPIs' are exceeded especially as the demand and price for Lithium improves going forward. Apart from Government approvals this is largely what will determine the future of most Lithium companies heading towards production. Increased demand will lead to more offtakes. higher prices, greater profits, more exploration, higher share price etc, etc.
Options for Directors are exercisable at 6 cents. The share price at the time needs to be greater than 6 cents before they would bother. A lot of holders will be in front or around even if the SP is 7 cents plus and hopefully a lot more.
So I will be voting to approve the proposed issue of shares under the PSP.
Maybe I need to go to Specsavers but as far as I can see the risks overall are decreasing rather than increasing. The big worry ATM is the Government approval to come through. There has been some positive anns of late. New acquisitions, BP33, Hendersons West and McGrants. We will likely see more tonnage as drilling and exploration continue.
Rumjungles assertions are nothing more than the 'Gamblers Fallacy' at work. Just because there has been a string of mining failures in the NT has no bearing whatsoever on the next venture or the one after that etc. The gamblers fallacy is basically that if say a coin toss shows 5 heads in a row you think you are on a run so the next one will be a head. The point being every coin toss can have a different outcome which will be a win or loss unless you bet on both coming up. And each toss is independent from the rest just as each mining venture is different.
You may even have a run of heads and bet on the next being a tail. Again the past tosses have no bearing or influence on the next toss or those after that.
Rumjungle will be hoping the toss favours his preferred outcome/bias but the outcome in reality will be independent from outcomes of the past. Remember that objectors in the main are happy for EVs to hit the road as long as the raw materials are not sourced from the NT.
I am maintaining a medium to longer term view on CXO. No point worrying about shorter term market noise from my perspective anyway.