Ann: Proposed Acquisition by J-Power - Results of Scheme Meeting, page-8

I agree that the low shareholder turnout is disappointing.
I have a feeling that many (most?) small retail shareholders disengage themselves from most shareholder meetings and do not even lodeg a vote because they have a view that "their vote really means nothing" as the outcome (usually only requiring a simple voting majority based on number of shares) has been "cut and dried" by the BEOT / suits way beforehand and the meeting is basically just a legally required formality to ratify the decision.
Even if all the small shareholders voted as a bloc, they usually would not affect the outcome (maybe causing a Strike on remuneration report is exception).

HOWEVER, Scheme of Arrangement meeting are completely different, where for the proposal to be accepted it is necessary for 75% of the SHARES that vote AND 50% of the SHAREHOLDERS (by number, 1 HIN == 1 vote) who vote to be in favour.

That means that a SOA meeting is about one of the only opportunities where small retail shareholders can have a significant say in the outcome, irrespective of their holding size.
I suspect that many small holdere are completely unaware of this situation, receiving meeting notices, wrongly thinking that their vote is insignificant and not evenr caring to lode a proxy vote.

How can we change this perception. There needs to be a big education campaign, and probably contrary to the view os companies and their boards, the share registry needs to be more accessible to shareholders at a much lower cost. Even though the share register may be inspected by any shareholder, I have a gut feeling that the fees charged were crafted to act as an impediment against activists who might wish to wage a campaign of support with shareholders that might be contrary to the views / wishes / aims of the board.
Basically it restricts access and such a campaign to those with deep pockets.

As a small retail innvestor, although I might have passionate views about the future direction of the company (GNX in this case), I do not have sufficiently deep pockets/spare cash to fund access toi the share register and a campaign directed to (in this case small) shareholders to promote my view and at least encourage them to vote.
If it was in the context of a 'political election', I may well have the enthusiasm, passion and resources to 'doorknock in support of a candidtate' or hand out 'How to Vote' cards at a polling booth.
In the corporate context, we are effectively hamstrung / handicapped / gagged by the company and its post who have every resource at therir disposal (and funded by the company) to peddle their position.

I think it is high time that retail shareholders were educated and made very aware that at times they DO HAVE SIGNIFICANT POWER in setting the destiny of a company and they SHOULD exercise it.
We also need to attempt a change in corporate culture where retail shareholders are just treated as 'cannon fodder' for their money, with the company using it (and the bod & execs handsomely rewarding themselves along the way), for be finally 'spat out' and deprived of the future potential of the company.
If that is the way that the corporate system is heading, we may ultimately find that the ASX and Aust corporations are not supported by retail investors, although heaven forbid that it gets anywhere near the way thing happen in USA .... not much better morals & ethics to what happened in gladiator rings.
If that happens, its a sad, sad Australia..