Ann: Notice of Annual General Meeting, page-2

interesting there is no comment on the generosity of management paying themselves options
for shares instead of wages. The excuse of saving cash burn does not wear with me. As of today
funding for operating (overheads) expenses should be found in the general funding activity. I call this
proposed activity , unnecessary dilution and the current management "looking after themselves" , although
they could be forgiven by some if there was a performance clause as part of the deal.
There are different ideas/ formulas in assessing the value of the transaction, I note management used
"the Black-Scholes model " and come up with the value to G.Pocock of $575,010.00...... added to
his retainer and super subsidy .... $800,000 .00 plus per year is a very generous earn for a company
still to find its feet.
As far as I am concerned our share price by 12/2020 would be north of $3.00, which means with
this allocation of options using Pococks issue as the example the value would be $9750000.00
less conversion cost $3312500.00 that leaves Pocock nearly $6.5 mil in front. this is " the Obvious model"
Part of that belongs to us...we the shareholder.

with this in mind Its a strong NO for clauses 5,6,and 7

a further thought.........this year is probably the opportune time to try this as in the future when
MIN and others are involved there is no way they would entertain this sort of boardroom deal.
I bet the ATO would follow the trail of this type of transaction as well.