BW The reason for the discussion is to understand what has...

BW

The reason for the discussion is to understand what has happened and why. If you don't understand history you are doomed to repeat the past.

People need to come to terms with some of the rationale and why some of the claims made are frankly not credible. Let alone the rationale for voting out the best CFO we've ever had.

There is always scope for people revising their views.

This is a discussion room, not an agreement room.

This is about how to best bring the company forward and to do that you must understand the past.

The Executive must work together, who would doubt that? There is no doubting GC is a genuine person who believes he has done his best for the company. He definitely has value to add, no question. I voted for his retention and he saw that. People are however entitled to question his strategy. and nothing you say addresses his deficiencies.

I talked to him about where I felt he had gone wrong, and I'm a straight shooter on that. He didn't want to go back that far but I think it's negligence not to and I explained why. This is about strategy, and how a poor strategy leads to bad results.

But I agree, Matt is now on the inside and is going to have to come to grips with some realities.

Also, FWIW there is no place for bullying methods, not here, not in an AGM and not prior to one.

On the upside we have a colossal opportunity with the battery space, and some other possible agreements are maturing. All IMO.