@naomhan,Any shareholder who was a shareholder at the time the...

@naomhan,

Any shareholder who was a shareholder at the time the performance shares were earned should have known what earning the 3 tranches of shares meant - it meant that the early shareholders (the vendor) would hold a minimum of 56.9% of Otis (ISX) if the performance criteria were not met and if met would hold 73.7%.

Given that this was stated at the time ISX was purchased by Otis Energy and the performance shares were voted on and approved - with all disadvantages openly disclosed - how in the world can you now say that this was "massively detrimental" to shareholders. If a shareholder didn't like the terms of the purchase of the earning of the shares they should have either sold their shares (if a shareholder of Otis) or if not, not bought them. Anyone who was not aware just plain did not read up on ISX before becoming a shareholder. And I ask, whose fault is that?

Fact: the shares were earned by the terms of earning the performance shares. Only ASX would claim that something is detrimental to shareholders by not considering the facts around the earning of the performance shares. ASX, in my opinion, is remis at looking at the facts that exist. Strange since ASX approved the terms of earning the performance shares back in 2014.