Given recent developments, I believe a board refresh is required.
Current board composition:
Roger Aston (Non-Executive Chairman)
Tony Keating (CEO and MD)
Chris Ntoumenopoulos (Non-Executive Director)
Nathan Buzza (Non-Executive Director)
Reasons why I believe a board refresh is required:
Lack of accountability: To date, the board has failed to fulfil their fundamental role - to deliver value to shareholders. This is not the first “disaster” the board has been responsible for. I think it is time that we, as shareholder’s, put them on notice that future failures will not be tolerated
Inability to deliver: To date we have heard a lot of positive spin in regards to commercial deals and our rapidly “growing pipeline”, yet we still have not closed a deal. I do not believe this fact is reflective of our technology, rather it appears to be the incompetence of the board to effectively promote and sell our product to the market
Lack of tangible value provided by non-executive board members: The company has failed to communicate what value the non-executive board members bring to the table. At the AGM, when the board was confronted with questions regarding their options, a key argument raised by them was certain board members have extensive biotech and regulatory approval experience. All board members were also said to have significant contacts in their respective fields which they were leveraging to propel ResApp’s commercialisation ambitions. However, in reality I fail to see tangible evidence of this. Firstly, the fact that the company was so confident of FDA approval, and supposedly as blindsided as us in regards to the decision demonstrates a lack of understanding regarding the inherent risks associated with an FDA application. Secondly, contracted revenues remain non-existent, so one has to question how effectively they have been at selling the ResApp story. Thirdly, they chose to deprioritise the sleep apnoea CE technical file submission to focus on the FDA application/ongoing queries and Sanofi direct to consumer product. Both of which currently appear to have been very poor strategic decisions
Apparent lack of conviction in the company’s future: Nathan holds no shares and justifies this position by arguing that one of the directors should remain independent. Yet he was more than happy to accept his options at the AGM… I find this to be hugely contradictory. Neither Roger or Chris have increased their holdings for a substantial period of time. And we all know that Tony holds no shares and is yet to exercise any of his options. Following the most recent announcements, I was hoping that at least one of the board members would step up and show their support by buying on market. If they are so confident that it will be a “transformational year”, why not put their words into action
In regards to Tony’s position, I personally believe he remains a valuable asset to the team and am not calling for his removal. However, I think it is clear that he needs more support to effectively perform his job and the current board composition appears inadequate to provide this.
I know this topic will be controversial, but I'm keen to hear other people's thoughts on the issue (both sides).
To be clear, I still strongly believe in the ResApp story and I am very confident we will succeed with the right leadership team. As we enter further into the commercialisation phase, we need a board that has a clear strategic direction, that adds tangible value and that is actively involved in promoting ResApp.
