I don't have official figures and so we could debate it back-and-forth but IMO 8% is not in my experience (and did they ever buy on-market or is this their holding (ex sales) since the IPO?).
Although insiders always do better as they're the captain of the ship, ultimately, everyone's interests are aligned if everyone makes or loses money together.
Let's compare the last 12 months only for both parties (some roundings used)
2 Execs & 2 KMP
1.9m Salaries*
3.3m Related party transactions (expenses and net purchases)** -2.5m Drop in shareholding value (50c=>35c = 31.6m decrease * 8% holding)
2.7m Net impact***
* FY15 Annual report Pg 12 (presumably they got a payrise?). I appreciate to earn a salary these guys put in time and effort whereas shareholders really don't.
** FY15 Annual report Pg 14. I appreciate roughly half of RP transactions will have some costs on the other side. The remaining half is rentals or purchases so I reckon minimal.
*** Add on another $1m for the sale of shares not captured in holding
Overall, these buys saw their wealth increase by ~$2.7m total (ex share sales).
Shareholders
A year ago the share price was roughly 50c (a lot worse if you go back further)
That's a loss of wealth of ~30% or $29m for the remaining 92% of shareholders.
Summary
Given it's been a rough couple of years, the directors have done pretty well for themselves.
Baring VA, it's hard to see any downside for directors but shareholders on the other hand....
P.S. Feel free to check my numbers (I did this calc very quickly and apologies if there's an error but I can't see an error to change the conclusion from an upside to downside for directors)
