@Dozen I think the frustration of commentators here is that the board of directors, who are each very well paid given the company is, in over a decade, yet to turn a profit, yet to make a single sale, and incapable of providing shareholders or the market with ambiguous communications that leave more questions than answers yet they are repeatedly putting their hands out for "Performance" rights.
Given that ALL (100%) of their substantial wages for over a decade are drawn from money raised by persons who have bought shares in capital raises, its a bit rich to be asking for performance shares when evidence of perfomance is is not tangible. One can only offer a dog a buscuit only to pull it away so often before the dog works it out.
Examples of poor comms can be found littered cross these threads - go through any announcement and there are pages of speculation as to what was meant, and no follow up when asked.
No announcement when DWER approval was granted. FFS thte chairman claimed to have not even been aware of it - it was left to shareholders to monitor meetings etc. and report to each other. Then the next few days a total about face with scant detail of what and why.
No announcement when the Sweden site lease expired.
Little wonder shareholders are pissed off. If your employer treated you like this you wouldn't furious, and dismayed.
Given the constant promises, changes of plans with confidence dropping, I reckon instead of performace shares being issued (noting the value of these each year are well in excess of most of our full holdings) a proportion (50%) the board's salary should be held in escrow until real meaningful milestones are met. How else can we be assured that our money is not just being used until its gone.
