AGM

We need to concentrate on the issues that matter.
ie OUR HARD EARNED MONEY!

There would be very few shareholders who have not lost considerable money on their investment in FMS.

At the upcoming AGM we shareholders have the opportunity to convey our views and requirements to the Board. That Board is there to represent our views, as we own the company.

This is just my personal view, but my vote is as follows:

RES 1: - a resounding AGAINST ---- because
(a) imho the Board failed shareholders by executing a deal (the Option Agreement) which was so manifestly rejected by non-Todd and non-Board shareholders.
(b) as a consequence of the rejection of the Option Agreement, FMS should be now running on a shoe-string budget. A 20% reduction in the fees of the Board and the salary of M/D is welcome, but these expenses are still too high. What of the other expenses and staffing/cost levels? Do we need 4 board members at all? A 20% reduction off a high base is frankly not that meaningful.

RES 2: - a resounding AGAINST --- because
(a1) all of the above
(a) we simply do not need 4 directors for such a small company
(b) we need some fresh ideas.
(c) FMS has external legal advisors. FMS already obtains legal advice externally.
(d) s/h need to send a message to the Board that s/h require a better outcome if they are to countenance the sale of the principal asset of FMS.

RES 3: a resounding AGAINST ---- because
(a) all of the above
(b) we simply will not contemplate further dilutive share issues
(c) the Board needs to be more creative, and bring to shareholders a better solution that the Option Agreement.
ie take better advantage of the asset we have.
(d) if FMS needs cash, then cut the outgoings first!

IMHO, the issues we shareholders had prior to the last GM, are still unchanged. We still insist on:
1. if PIOP is to be sold, the proceeds MUST be fully distributed to shareholders. The most efficient way for that to occur is via a takeover
2. any proposal must be fully transparent. There can be no leakage of funds up to FMS corporate, such that we continue with the same-old same-old.
3. any proposal must have certainty
4. any proposal must be at a price which reflects the true value and potential of PIOP.

IMHO, FMS shareholders should make sure they exercise their right to vote.

cheers