Are Whiddon and Freeman actually incentivised to realise assets...

Are Whiddon and Freeman actually incentivised to realise assets and return proceeds to shareholders when they're respectively drawing total compensation nearing half a million dollars? Not saying that's the case but considering what they've actually stated, and this goes to the very core of what the company's publicly stated intent of asset realisation was & then done the opposite without any shareholder engagement to ultimately present it as a 'fait accompli' through a blindsiding market release on Friday...I'd understand how that line of thinking would be plausible. Many Directors of a micro cap would (arguably) be feeling pretty 'special' pulling those levels of remuneration.

Simple question? Why retain any of the (meagre) Montney proceeds if the disposal already saves Calima a million dollars a year & the Blackspur assets are free cash flow generative & capable of delivering further returns to investors? They've stated just that on investor calls & in market releases. What gives?

Last thing.....fellow investors, be careful with your language. I'm as enraged as the rest of you however the last thing anyone here wants is to be on the end of defamation proceedings. I think you can say what you intend, just be careful the way you do it......
Currently there's one public case in the media where an ASX listed company has applied for a court order to get the identities of HC account posters under a defamation action. Careful how/where you step.