Ann: Four Mile Project - Completion of Sale to Quasar, page-38

Sadly, I have to agree with your post billy2803. We learned more from HC posters who took the time to attend the court sessions than we ever did from management. I can't even find reference to Dragoman in the Annual Report; and yet this low ball park sale seems to me to bear the hallmark of dragoman - the company we allegedly paid so much to for advice.

Sorry FO but I can't work out the intent of your posts, other than to think you want to exonerate management. .. "Risk" seems to me to be one of the most used words in the last annual - but to me the biggest risk AGS took was in allowing our cash reserves to get as low as they did, when they did.

Respect is a mutual thing. Except for the sale itself I voted, over the years, for all motions as recommended by management, including remuneration. I was surprised therefore to see shareholder opposition to company remuneration at the last vote. And even more surprised to see it whitewashed in this year's annual report: represented almost as a positive - mentioning the "41% for" rather than the "59% against".

"The company received 41.41% of 'for' votes in relation to its remuneration report for the year ended 30 June 2014. The company did not receive any specific feedback at the AGM regarding its remuneration practices and considered the first strike to be a reflection of the state affairs of the company at the time and not remuneration..."

If we carry on as a going concern I hope the company will at least reshuffle the old board in the years ahead. The register has already been given a massive reshuffle, in the company's favour, following the exodus of long term holders.