I do think a healthy conversation about the board is warranted, particularly given the company is struggling to deliver on its business plan.
Having an octogenarian as chair at this critical point of commercialisation is not ideal. Vic has done a fantastic job getting it to this point - but it’s time to step aside for a chair with broader global commercial expertise and real runs on the board in managing successful companies. The chair needs to be independent, and see the business (good and bad) with fresh eyes to have an effect. I also think Vic stepping away will allow Martin as CEO and the rest of the board fresh air to run the show their way. It’s now at the point that Vic’s ongoing and very expensive tenure is doing more harm than good - why selfishly destroy your legacy? He’ll always be celebrated as our founder, a major shareholder and involved in a ceremonial capacity. It’s time to step back and let someone else lead. Please.
I welcome the industry experience brought in by Chuck and Gerd, however the board is clearly lacking in commercial acumen, marketing, sales, real estate and communication expertise. Errors and omissions in the day to day strategic and operational efforts of the company are continually being ignored at the bemusement of shareholders - good governance by an equiped board would see this called out and rectified. ASX listed companies are required to report on the extent to which they have followed the Principles and Recommendations set by the ASX for good corporate governance . Our companies corporate governance statement is up on our website for all to see, and self admittedly reports that the board largely does not comply in relation to the principle ‘structure the board to add value.’See below for this.
I think this is a real shame. If the board was structured to add value, perhaps we could take the next step as a business? Ultimately the board is accountable to shareholders - so we do have a degree of power in this conversation.
