Ann: Chairman's Address and Presentation to AGM, page-68

OK this will be quick.

1. Previously I indicated that how I imagined Joe Maeji's stance was truly indicative of how I would like to proceed. As it turned out, he took a stance precisely aligned with what I'd outlined would be reasonable and logical for him to take.
It seems incredible that others present at the meeting didn't note his extraordinary statement of support of Alan Studley, after the vote came in.
He explained that he usually did not formally contribute on AGM occasions, but he was making an exception here, that is what made it extraordinary. He said that at first, he was resistant, even hostile towards AS and what he was attempting to do. But then he came to a deep understanding of why those actions (painful as they were) became necessary. There was a lot of emotion in the room, and I'd suggest some fear and loathing was present. I'd suggest much of it was misguided.

2. The vote must have been a late development, it certainly took John Hurrel by surprise. Obviously there has been some argy bargy going on. It's not a good look.

It should be obvious that John Hurrel and Alan Studley undertook a salvage operation. If you think it was a simple matter, and that the only hero is Matt Sanderson digging into his pockets, I'd think again.

I would suggest that the Chairman took the view that you don't air your dirty linen in public, and he did not publicise the issues about the near bankruptcy for obvious reasons. How could he? He took a more noble route in encouraging support of all encumbents.

3. what is the issue with people imagining some kind of irregularity in the voting procedure? It was embarassing also to have lectures from individuals who don't know the difference between the role of Chairman and CEO.

...more to come