Handy there is no equality or democracy where one person does not equal one vote.
On the ASX it’s the ones with the big ass swags of shares who get the power.
And to assume that’s OK because they invested more is codswallop as at least one of the biggest asses around here paid a fraction of what shares cost most others - including RCF - by coming in at seed stage.
@Troydt you wrote ‘most here are here for the vanadium’ and asked me to look at CI costs.
I disagree.
Most of the ‘weight’ is here to make money.
And your costs are badly out of date.
And where is the undemocratic ‘rub’ here (‘Aye there it is’?
RCF is *not* a regular guy just like you and me Handy - it’s a highly professional, very highly regarded investment company which paid 37.5c or thereabouts for each of $13.5m worth of shares .
As a result it’s’ taken a very close interest in its’investment here - including to putting a director on the board until early this year.
It’s also put huge focus into AVL!
It understands the value potentials there better than anyone here and it supports the merge!
Vs who?
And what price did they pay?
Let’s look back to early days here when team Cicero and mates decided to launch a vanadium company?
Who is ‘team Cicero?’
How much did the seed investors pay?
How many millions of free shares/options have some - eg Matthew Walker - been subsequently granted?
What do they want?
Personally I think RCF is trying to protect its’ investment here and, accordingly, the investments of anyone else who bought in high!
And I think it’s commendable that Ian Prentice (very much a Cicero man?) agrees with the course decided on.
So a real question here is : Are the rest of those big asses with the cheap shares in or out?
And which holders of the 22 who signed the letters are the true ‘puppets’ here?
And which are operating under a genuine impression that they understand the value proposition better than management and RCF et al.
And who out there is just bored, in the red, and wants to kick up a stink?
?
