The problem is not that previous shareholders approved perf shares based on revenue. The problem is clearly the questions around the quality of the revenue that was used. Essentially, was the revenue legitimate and up to the standards of an ASX listed company (or any company which is why ASIC is involved)? Surely you can see what the problem is here and the difference from what you're presenting? This is just more of your mental gymnastics to focus on something that is not even the crux of the issue. Do you think ASIC is investigating the company over whether Otis shareholders voted for revenue based incentives or not? No, ASIC is investigating serious allegations made in relation to the way in which management met those revenue hurdles to claim those perf shares.
