Not at all. Only 'good news' if you are CEO with no capital...

Not at all. Only 'good news' if you are CEO with no capital invested receiving an obscene wage on whom the dilution will have no effect.
Really becoming surreal hearing the optioned apologists defending the indefensible.
Let me pose a counterfactual conditional for you. If the company was mining and shipping ore and on paper earning 1bn, would you be ok with the CEO being paid $1.1bn?
I guess no. Likewise the continuous capital raises and dilution are wiping out the capital base and it is having to be replenished with more generous terms each time benefitting only the salaried non holders or the free optioned associates.
How is this differernt from SMMs conduct?
My concern is the SIG and the land owners are watching closely and AVQ leadership is not showing itself by its actions to be any more concerned about its 20% stakeholders than it is about any if its shareholders. How much longer before another player steps in without the taint of history?