Ann: Notice of Annual General Meeting/Proxy Form, page-50

@Donkeyboy Your current thoughts are basically identical to what mine were last year. At that stage I figured if there was no progress this year shareholders would not let the company off. Though my concerns are less to do with the lack of progress (which admittedly is concerning) and more to do with the governance and renumeration issues.

I do agree that board entitlement is not limited to EGR. Though interesting the company told me their peers for comparison were SYR, RNU and BKT- all three of which don’t use performance incentives for NED and 2/3 use TSR/CAGR before performance rights vest for management (so they have to increase shareholder value to get performance rights unlike ours). In other words, we are actually an outlier with our governance and remuneration practices compared to our peers.

If your main concern is potential instability, you can always vote against the remuneration and also against the spill. The vote against the remuneration last year didn’t result in any real instability. A spill and then non re-election of the directors during that spill is probably the only thing that has the potential for instability, however I suspect that instability would be much lower than that caused by Dale leaving.

In regards to Dale Harris I too share your concerns. Roy Hill is obviously a much bigger company so can understand the lure. But if EGR was genuinely on the cusp of achieving what they suggest they are, his leaving seems a tad odd. His 1.75mil performance rights were only for his first year and would have increased significantly again this year if he stayed given Howard is usually gifted something similar to whatever AS is granted. Although i am equally as concerned that despite being on $600k and what seems a concerningly low share price, he never once bought any shares (not that there’s a great need when you’re gifted them I guess).