I understand the idea behind incentives but am yet to see it in...

I understand the idea behind incentives but am yet to see it in practice actually make a difference besides in Joel Greenblatts book. The problem I have seen is that it incentivises management to create/present false or misleading financial metrics ( think ENRON). My logic is if you are employed and being payed to do a job, manage BRN, your pay should reflect your incentive with minimum performance rights compared to the register. When performance rights are given at the magnitude that they have been what you will find is that you are actually paying them out of YOUR pocket. I'll repeat that, YOUR pocket. To think that the rights are set at .18c is as ridiculous a low bar as is a goal of 500k. The options, if they are based on a black scholes model, will be exercised easily. The model is based on price fluctuations and time decay, for it to go from .13c to 18c represents a roughly 40% move, any return in percentages like that is huge yet ask any holder what the future value of this tech is and I guarantee it has a $ sign in it. As cyber has already put it, it moved 70% in one day yet what happened? The point I'm getting at is if we are on the cusp of breaking out it is a risk less option rewarded to management that costs shareholders a minimum of 5% or more not only of any future dividends or capital appreciation but of any takeover offer. How anyone could be happy losing more than 5% of there potential multiple dollar stock for a business deal put together worth 500k is beyond me. We payed to be apart and own BRN, they haven't yet now they are starting to own more than we do. If they can deliver, fair enough but so far they have climbed a set of stairs business wise and are celebrating like it was Mount Everest.