Hey @DavidspadesGood Qs...The way I see this is that all...

Hey @Davidspades

Good Qs...

The way I see this is that all resolutions except for Res. 6 are "personal", i.e. shares because Andrew lent xxx to the company, or for loan establishment, performance rights etc.

Res. 6 doesn't impact a single, one person, in the management, just that the company can't issue more shares. Res. 6 also is 10% additional beyond the 15% allowance annually, which at this stage isn't for a defined particular purpose, just that they can issue them at some point. So voting against this resolution makes sense to reduce dilution without appearing to "offend management".

I don't think opposing res. 6 was much to do with a take over, but what I did find interesting was Res 4. (Performance shares based on achieving certain milestones) which first mentioned a Take Over:



I don't think a TO is a serious situation at this stage, but ROG could become a target at some point I guess, hence that clause IMO.


As for Guy Le Page, yes, very strange timing right before AGM.... I have no idea about that, or why, would be interesting to find out the reason there.

Cheers
MSN