Share
11,063 Posts.
lightbulb Created with Sketch. 2144
clock Created with Sketch. 18/07/20
23:56
Share
Originally posted by aniesbaswedan:
↑
The difference is that in other companies we have numerous large institutions and independent sophisticated investors among many others, whose independent interests are hopefully aligned with yours. It wouldn't be fool proof because checks and balances in a system by default only help to prevent mistakes and not bad intentions. At the very least, however, if the majority of SOI are owned by some degree of varied independent entities then it would be more difficult for nefarious intentions to be realised in a particular company generally. In the case of ISX in my view, the moment the performance shares were released all the power virtually went to ISX . The numbers that were released was so massive that independent entities, which includes ordinary holders like you, no longer have any power whatsoever . After the release of the performance shares, the CEO, the board, red 5 and many others, hold such overhwelming number of shares that your votes now do not matter . I think what happened in the AGM in terms of the voting decisions was a clear illustration of this. What I find it truly sad and infuriating is that instead of working hard to try and get that "power" back people are actually defending ISX.
Expand
fool. The performance shares were put forward and voted on by SH. If the got them legally or illegally they still have that many shares. You're putting forward a meaningless hypothetical view that isnt real. They have that many shares, your whole post is pointless utter crap and a waste of time, even with the red biro!!!!
