@dropside don't know if the meeting will be recorded but if it...

@dropside don't know if the meeting will be recorded but if it is it could be posted at the following link:

Investor Announcements - Australian Family Lawyers

The recording of the presentation for FY23 results can be found there.

Your comment "Makes you wonder what was going on before." is interesting on so many levels. My take is that the old management was rewarded on increasing EBITDA so any M&A that made increased the Group's EBITDA was pursued even where it was not necessarily in the best interest of the shareholders. Accounting approaches were taken to move "expenses" below the EBITDA level (eg capitalizing the costs of websites and then amortizing that cost) and where the "magic" of AASB 19 - accounting for leases - has turned rent from an expense to a financing and amortization cost (ie interest and amortization of the "right to use asset"). The M&A wasn't bedded down properly, and the daily grind of the business was not given enough attention as it wasn't going to increase EBITDA quickly....... In summary, misaligned incentives for management and having an executive chairman wasn't the best governance structure.

Further, one has to be very careful not to mistake correlation with causation but lawyers who left the group are now considering returning which also coincides with the departure of the last of the "old guard". Maybe the new culture that McFadden is creating is more appealing for employed lawyers than under GD? From the AGM report it would appear so.

One thing is that observers like us will never know exactly what "was going on before". But pretty much everything comes down to governance and culture.

Also, on reflection, my comments above could be construed as being overly negative on M&A. For clarification purposes, I think that the company should consider all M&A opportunities that are presented to it (indeed it would possibly be negligent if they were not considered). But AFL should only pull the trigger on a transaction where there is basically no downside, only upside and the integration of the businesses will be simple and seamless. And that begs the question do those transactions actually exist? Difficult to find but if they do exist go for it. In 12 months it might be a different story - need scale to obtain further leverage and the organization can handle the distraction of M&A - both financially and operationally.

PS: sorry to wake from my slumber before Feb. Some comments pique my interest too much not to respond.

Best

BSP

NFA, DYOR, GLTAH