B) No I Don't Like Dilution, page-62

At the risk of suffering Bonsaboy's wrath for broaching this subject....

As I have previously stated, I have no problem with adequate remuneration for the directors, however the sheer quantity seems purely self serving even though their interests are now aligned to shareholders.
With regard to your reference to other directors being paid $1mil, what are you making this call based on and relative to what? Other companies of GMC's size? www.payscale.com/research/AU/Job=Executive_Director/Salary
Additionally, it's not just the value of the shares that are hugely affected, it will have a big impact on future dividends which will have a compounding effect as you could potentially use the additional dividends you would have received for further investment. This is a big future cost to shareholders. (Of course I mean long term investors).
I would have voted yes if they had gone for a quarter of that amount but they knew they would succeed so they pushed for more. I guess we can all be grateful they didn't go for double that because they probably would have got it based on sheer apathy.
In short, I appreciate what you're saying but it still really irks me.