The irony of Mr Ding Xu and Sitong Wu citing independence and objectivity when they represent the interests of a Chinese state owned company. The management of ZEU have demonstrated neither the short term nor the long term interests of shareholders during their vapid tenure.
The directors proposed should be residing in Australia and best positioned to work in the interests of the Australian shareholders of Zeus Resources.
Since the inauguration of Zeus Resources on the ASX in 2012, it has been repeatedly demonstrated that the directors have been ineffectual at making substantive progress on the exploration scene, most likely held down by communist party bureaucracy back in China.
Remember, the largest shareholder who has been responsible for appointing all directors bar one is Zhengyuan International Mining Co (ZIMC) which is a wholly owned subsidiary of Chinese state owned China Metallurgical Geology Bureau (CMGB).
Mr Ding Xu and Sitong Wu both represent the interests of ZIMC, which is controlled by the Chinese state through CMGB. They're in no position to evoke objectivity and impartiality.
The hypocrisy of this statement is mesmerising. Per the last annual report issued in 2023, Zhengyuan International Mining Co (ZIMC) held 12.61% of issued stock in the company. They have been responsible for appointing all directors to the company bar one which was reserved for Vast Honour Global Ltd who per the founding constitution is entitled to appoint one director.
Since the question relates to fairness, is it fair and equitable that the board of the company is composed and controlled from Beijing and the hallways of the state owned China Metallurgical Geology Bureau (CMGB)?
In terms of detriment, hasn't the ineffectual management of the company since 2012 demonstrated ample detriment? What does the company have to show for 12 years? Certainly nothing of substance exploration wise.
Sure, Colin certainly did make an error and took the appropriate course of action in resigning for not respecting applicable trading windows.
At least the one positive aspect of the incident is that he actually acquired shares in the company on the market like the majority of shareholders. When was the last time the current crop of ZEU directors acquired shares on the market?
In terms of negatively impacting shareholder value, breaching the trading policy without malicious intent or benefit is certainly not the reason.
The company has spent most of its existence using the angle that it is waiting for the WA state government to change it's position on Uranium mining. To this end, the company was suspended in 2021 under listing rule 12.1.
12.1 The level of an entity's operations must, in ASX's opinion, be sufficient to warrant the continued +quotation of the entity's +securities and its continued listing.That is ultimately the reason why the share price continues to devalue. The company still does not undertake meaningful acquisition or exploration. The company continues to acquire washed up tenements through application or ballot process, to which it might undertake field work at a snail's pace. This activity barely warrants any market interest and hence the continued depreciation in the share price.
Trying to blame the depreciation in value on one incident of breaching insider trading policy is laughable and disingenuous.
Applying for tenements is hardly a complicated and sophisticated process, let alone one to use as vindication for the board's performance. Anyone can apply for tenements, anyone can be a prospector as such. The process is simple and easy to navigate for the layman.
Securing moose pasture that was previously explored will not create share price appreciation for shareholders.
Trying to claim credit for exiting suspension due to listing rule 12.1 is the height of hilarity. Considering that the majority of the board was composed by China's state owned ZIMC - they are literally patting themselves on the back for resumption of trading after their own incompetence, which was suspension due to LR 12.1 - years of inactivity while supposedly waiting for WA state gov to alter it's view on uranium mining.
Ultimately, its time for a new management, one that is proactive rather than reactive.
Another laughable statement drowning in hypocrisy.
The two directors who signed this statement have been appointed by Chinese government state owned ZIMC (subsidiary of CGMB), per their own disclosures and indirect interests. They seek to maintain the control and dominance of ZIMC over an Australian listed entity despite only holding 12.61% of shares on issue.
Per ZIMC's 203D/249D filing on 22 April 2024, they also seek to remove the company's founding constitutional clause that entitles Vast Global to one director due to their near equivalent holding of 12.58%.
In my honest opinion, it is ample time that this company's board of directors is returned to delivering in the interests of the shareholders that represent the other 87.39% of shareholders. Its absurd to think a Chinese government subsidiary believes it can control the destiny of an Australian listed company when they only hold 12.61% of shares on issue.
A new board that will deliver tangible benefits to shareholders by being proactive is required. Exploration by its nature is being proactive and not sitting on ones laurels pontificating coming out of suspension as being a momentous success.
(20min delay)