Delineating ASX public listed Company’s Voting System., page-20

I’m no expert and simple see it as unfairnesses to the small retail investor, who in many cases go thru the motion of voting.

From my perspective, we should take into consideration and place greater significance to the title of the business entity.

AGL is classed as a “PUBLIC LISTED”, company and has transformed into a pseudo - private company since all the amendments to the Corporation Act.
The only thing public, as a facade, is the manner off gaining funds and little else.

As an analogy in a unit complex, currently MCB is the penthouse owner and is dictating how and where the body corporate monies should be spent.

From my bit off research “poll voting” was introduced to counter activism from the pleb shareholder’s but we mustn’t forget that during those times the Custodian’s and Nominees company’s stood on the sideline when it came to voting.

Now the BOD not only have to contend with both ends of the extreme voting spectrum - the pleb and wealthy shareholders!

The problem that I can see, is the voting methodology within the Corporation Act is common to all types of business entities.

What I find interesting is the lazy shareholders who have holding in a Custodian or Nominee company their votes are counted even thou they have a right to participate as individual shareholders.

Yet retail investors who don’t actively partake their votes are dismissed…when it comes to financial rewarding an individual, should it be considered as a default NO vote with the Chairman acting as their proxy representative?

It is my suspicion that the change to poll voting, using activism as justification was simply a secondary consideration, when the true motive was to gain better control of achieving the rewards put forward to the voters.

When u pursue many companies T20, their colleagues with in this group, go thru similar criteria to gain their rewards.