Perhaps share holders might take keener interest in voting on...

Perhaps share holders might take keener interest in voting on remuneration and share performance awards on the next AGM. JDW has bought 20,000 shares and now an additional 35,000 from his own pocket to date, to shoot into top place amongst insider buying in the last 2 years (not a difficult chart to top - but at least none selling). The market barely blinked - and no surprise given share awards.

JDW for example was awarded 250,000 shares at the AGM and 4,000,000 options at $0.40 for May 2028 expiry on joining. As I have said in other posts, Black and Scholes not really an accurate model for employment based share options (as they are not tradeable and B&S assumes arbitrage at its heart of modelling) but at a say 60 delta on May 2028 forward value for the stock, he holds some 2,400,000 equivalency in shareholders by probability equated value of his call options.

Shareholders in their passivity sometimes overlook the value of options to Directors. 55,000 shares is nothing to 2,400,000 equivalency held by award. Unless the share price is north of $0.50 come November, it will be a big N.O. vote on additional share awards for me, expiring options or not. Whilst JDW will feel vindicated in improving the register 'against takeovers' (I've still yet to see the study showing rich investors a better defence against selling out to takeover offers than general retail investors - but would welcome being proven wrong anecdotally with a an actual take-over attempt), the off-market buy-in for our new rich peer owners was a massive missed opportunity cost for existing shareholders versus the on-market buying we were hinted would be encouraged:

"I believe we present a compelling investment case, and we are starting to gain traction with some high-profile investors buying on market. There is more work to do, but we are clear on the path ahead to optimise the share register, and what it will take to drive upward pressure on the stock price." (JDW @ AGM).

Existing shareholders would not be seeing a $0.365 share price if professional, institutional or even high-profile investors were really buying on market on any volume and certainly wouldn't be if our rich friends had to buiy on market in a stock that has still only traded some 8,000,000 shares year to date (as said before imagine the effects of them buying only 5 million on-market of the 10 million off-market they did).

Get writing emails to JDW and PA people or vote against further share/option awards at the AGM unless (by October) the stock price is sufficiently higher or any further off-market dilutory placements that offer little value to existing shareholders, as evidenced by the recent share price fall on the merest whiff of us weakness - the SP500 still over 20% higher than it was a year ago.

And sorry to go on, but more lowly $0.40 striked options since JDW took over goverance did not "align the Executive Team's total remuneration with the value created for our shareholders". I get his hands were a little tied with Kim Beazely and Fiona Wood given past awards, but going forward, shareholders do not need a keen understanding of options theory - the global regulators/accountants don't that they apply B&S pricing per international accounting standards - to grasp that a $0.60 strike price, rather than a $0.40 strike price means your Directors have to work a lot harder on getting the share price higher in 'alignment with value for shareholders' to get their own share awards over the line - not quite that simple, but people should get the drift.