No offence meant but it appears confusion is a two way street?
re: "
Firstly, they are separate from management, they aren’t there for the day to day running and only meet with the management once a month."
** the following excerpts from your previous posts were made under what premise then? knowing full well the conclusion would be;
~ both you and I knowing that it is NOT the role of the Non-Executive Directors? From your post:
https://hotcopper.com.au/threads/ffx-shareholders-action-group-q-a.7507140/page-104?post_id=69156225re:
Instead of attacks of me, can anyone answer the below:1. Are the new directors willing to go to Mali and sit down with government officials to show that the company will work to resolve any issues?2. Do the proposed directors have any dealings with the highest levels of government?From your post:
https://hotcopper.com.au/threads/ann-government-of-mali.7509742/page-9?post_id=69144470re:
I'm sure the new proposed board would be willing to jump on a plane to Bamako and sort this out asap right? Garry, Gareth, Zoran how are your government negotiation skills?
** Before you made your decision on how you were going to vote, did you ask the incumbent Board the same questions?
Point of correction: Borg still owns 12 million shares as per the final director interest notice and this matched with the most recent annual report to shareholders.
re: "The thought that he knew and did nothing and allowed himself and his investment to get into this mess is ridiculous."
~ maybe look a bit closer .. .. .. .. .. 
re: "Lastly, Brendan was appointed to the board of FFX when the sh!t hit the fan regarding James McKay and his walkout with that directorship. Brendan stepped up to save his investment and guide FFX/LLL with what he was told."
Point of correction: in 2018 there was no such thing as LLL to guide!
Let me rehash those sentences slightly: **
Brendan was Gareth, Garry & Zoran appointed to the board of FFX when the sh!t hit the fan regarding
James McKay Firefinch's
and his walkout
with t
hat directorship from Morila SA.
**
Brendan Gareth, Garry & Zoran stepped up to save
his their investment and guide FFX
/LLL with what he was told moving forward."
On one hand, you laud Borg for stepping up to save his investment.
On the other hand, you firstly mock the appearance/looks of total strangers and then ridicule the proposed board or those that have nominated the proposed board for attempting to take the exact same measures of Borg, and that is to save their investment/s.
Highlighting Borgs credentials to serve what purpose?
He was on the Board as an independent Non Executive director, nothing more nothing less, we had a contract geologist in Bill Oliver, did we not?
From memory, I do not recall Borg being engaged as Consultant whilst on the Board?
If you can be bothered, have a good look at the definitions that can affect being an independent director in the Company's own policies.
Then match all the clauses that affect each of the current directors, then explain to me how they are still declaring themselves as being 'independent"
But you dare to make quips about "self interests" of commentators that have a lot of capital trapped versus both Borg and Hepburn being circumstantially fortunate enough to realise all their monetary capital costs.
~ Hepburn between the 3rd March 2022 - 26th May 2022, sold 839,224 shares for a gross value of $846,777 leaving 1,500,000 FPO shares "free carried."
~ Borg between the 3rd May 2022, sold 2,578,448 shares for a gross value of $2,880,226 leaving 12,000,000 FPO "free carried."
The longer this goes on, the more of these "I have heard" points are becoming close to being factual .. .. ..
https://hotcopper.com.au/threads/i-have-heard.7398688/?post_id=67946785Tomorrow is going to be interesting indeed!
Voting outcome dependent, I anticipate there will be another s249D incoming at some point.
@Wombat2 Doesn't by any means provide an avenue to be exonerated for their performances or more pointed, lack of performance.
Claiming ignorance is not a defence .. ..
One of the key fiduciary duties, is a duty of care which describes the level of competence and business judgement expected of board members, this is commonly expressed as to provide a level of care that an ordinary prudent person would exercise in a similar position and under similar circumstances.
A reasonable prudent person would exercise reasonable care when making business decisions as a company steward, which would ensure being well informed and fully understand the issues surrounding making a decision/s.
Who made the decision to walk away from Morila?
On what advice was the decision made? Legal, financial? Combination of both?
~ If it was based solely or partially on legal advice, did that legal advice come only from domiciled Australian lawyers or Malian lawyers of a combination of both. This is probably IMO one of the most relevant as per Lowe's statements at the AGM where in his experience working across 6 African countries their legal systems are different and are not what you would encounter in Australia!
~ there has to be a reason why the company has engaged on of the largest law firms in the world to be represented for what has simply been described as "good faith" discussions!
Finally, not everyone that takes an action is motivated by self interests .. .. ..Cheers
ps:
I do want to thank all the "large shareholders" that have appeared recently ,, ,,
(a) to tell us they were large shareholders with an arrogance of some sort of superiority, just to inform us mere "lesser" holders that they are voting against all the resolutions for whatever (i)
the reason of the day was and/or (ii) what they were told to say!
~ I personally think the one where most have recited the company verbatim, being;
Quote: " Implementing a material reorganisation of the composition of the board in the manner proposed by the Convening Shareholders would represent a
significant destabilising event at the utmost importance to the company's future as it prepares to either realise its strategy in relation to the Process or conduct a material return of assets to Shareholders. Such destabilisation could cause the existing negotiations to break down or otherwise place potential transactions at risk and potentially jeopardise the Board's alternate proposal to return the company's assets in a manner that is tax effective and fair to all shareholders."
Two questions from this statement:
1: Since the company was served the 249D document, it has announced the termination of the
only executive of the company Scott Lowe,
received a letter from the Mali government (after social media posts) and provided a compelling update inclusive of the
government of Mali not signing the deed for the sale of the 80% share of Morila SA among other things.
~ what impact of these multiple destabilising event will it have on "the above."
2: How can a change of the composition of the board have any material effect on the ATO ruling for a return of company assets back to shareholders?
~ as previously posted, Treadstone Resource Partners are engaged by Firefinch the company, Gilbert & Tobin are engaged by Firefinch the company, the ATO correspondence is with a representative of Firefinch the company and finally Clifford Chance is engaged by Firefinch the company.
(b) suffice to say, post your hearts away as other "large shareholders" have contacted us (us being the lunatics organising this action) to make it known that as they were previously undecided the didn't share the same views to the "large holder" comments but the recent announcement was highlighting the failings of the current Board - to which the have cast their votes accordingly to the correspondence!
