Ann: Half Yearly Report and Accounts, page-167

Thanks.

I understand why they (actually, it’s pretty much only 1 member masquerading as 3-4 other accounts) would be aggrieved by my commentary on John Wellborn, as they’ve outed themselves previously as being a confidant of his.

But if he didn’t provide a reason for me to be dissatisfied with his performance then I’d have no reason to comment on it.

He’s been in this role long enough now to have at least done something for shareholders ROI to warrant his pay packet - but HE’S DONE NOTHING even remotely worthwhile so far.

It’s very easy to understand why people could/would think the trucking deal was “worthwhile”, given it should result in us paying less fees for haulage BUT AGAIN, that comes at a cost. And if the costs outweigh the potential savings then trying to claim that as an achievement is extremely false!

I actually can’t imagine there’s anyone holding FEX right now for any major reason apart from the dividends. It’s pretty much all about divies!

So, if the F/N trucking deal is going to result in SUBSTANTIAL dilution of the register, that obviously means we’re (all shareholders) then going to receive a lesser dividend payment.

And the question I’m then asking myself is; would we, over LOM time, receive a lesser dividend payment if we weren’t incurring the dilution from the trucking deal but then also passing up the savings it’s being projected to generate?
The messiah - John Wellborn, is trying to maintain absolutely NOT. However, to date, he’s failed miserably in demonstrating specifically why. Hence, the partial reasoning for my ongoing dissatisfaction of his mismanagement.

All IMO.