BOD removal process, page-17

Cheers Art, I haven't proposed it, merely described how it is done and suggested it is worth discussing. It would be 'dramatic', but whether 'unnecessary' or preferable would be the question to be determined.

To be fair, my unhappiness with this proposal has now progressed to considering the alternatives. You'll understand if the alternatives haven't just sprung fully-formed into existence in response to this 'year in the making', 'audacious and visionary' plan as you describe it.

I expect the cost of Bodyguard production and marketing has been examined in detail by OBJ. The guy responsible for the program intimated he was ready to go at the AGM.

The contract manufacture and marketing of it doesn't seem likely to be completely out of the reach of a CR with current holders, in my opinion.

This, and the better royalties overseen by a smaller BOD may be more attractive than immediate severe dilution, followed by 3 years of absolutely massive, draining repayments.

Equally, it may not, since many seem to feel that we have been walked fatly onto the bridge, strapped into the bungee cords and all that remains is to jump and so jump we must.

I am merely pointing out it is still possible at this stage to choose to unbuckle the bungee straps, walk back to the car and drive home.

Of course, practically speaking, there would be no BOD spill motion put unless the proposal is voted down at the January meeting.

Even in that case, a better proposal might surface that would be more attractive than a spill.

Despite my own concerns and reservations, a 'Yes' vote seems highly likely.

Bungeeeeeeeee!