Ann: Notice of Annual General Meeting/Proxy Form , page-4

re: Ann: Notice of Annual General Meeting/Pro... Who said that I was concerned about any so called "sacrifices' made by our directors, desire?

Yes, I've read the AGM agenda and that's probably more than can be said for most shareholders who just give the document a cursory glance and don't even bother to go to the trouble of understanding how the resolutions impact on them let alone going to the trouble of voting on them.

Don't get my reference to "human side" confused with anything to do with a reference to being humane.

How does a director put himself in a position to be granted 1,000,000 share options exercisable at 30% above the 5 days average trading prior to the date of issue and exercisable on or before 28 November 2013?

It's not a bad deal if you can get it bearing in mind that the company is entering a growth phase as it moves into production and the share price according to the same director is presently grossly undervalued.

It's a fact that the Managing Director owns a significant number of shares and options in the company but how does he continually stump up ever increasing amounts of capital to fund his ability to maintain his shareholding in the company in relative terms?

You've right, he doesn't have to.

Apathetic shareholders fund him by allowing him and his fellow directors to put their collective snouts into the corporate trough by granting them a swag of free options (read "free money"). These are the same shareholders who don't even bother to read the documentation sent to them by the company. The same shareholders who are generally too lazy to go to the trouble of voting "NO" to such a proposal. The same shareholders who are generally the first to sell their shares or complain when the share price isn't moving up.

Don't worry, corporate greed is alive and well and feeds off and relies on shareholder apathy and that's what I meant by the "human side".

Who sets the table at the banquet of greed? How is it possible for company directors to stuff themselves on grossly inflated salary packages and generous servings of share options while the average shareholder looks on and gets their holding diluted?

Who do we blame?

Some interesting facts that are worth noting:

Rates of attendance at AGM by shareholders:

In 99% of AGMs shareholders attending in person represented no more than 10% of all shareholders.

In 99% of AGMs, shareholders participating by proxy represented mo more than than 20% of all shareholders.

In 98% of AGMs, shareholders attending in person or participating by proxy represented no more than 20% of all shareholders in the company.

Shares represented at AGM:

In 87% of AGMs shareholders attending in person held half or less of the issued shares in the company.

In 63% of AGMs shareholders participating held half or less of the issued shares in the company.

Reference:

http://law.anu.edu.au/CCL/publications/TheRoleofShareholders.pdf

Tell me desire, do you think that enough shareholders will go to the trouble of voting down these resolutions?

I don't think so, that's the human side.

Stagman