Wayword,You are correct that I didn't understand your comments...

Wayword,

You are correct that I didn't understand your comments to mean that you think they are breaking ASX rules. However, let me be clear. They are not.

Nowhere have I, DR, or anyone else said that you cannot issue "Performance Rights (or shares)" to NEDs. What I said in my original post was that you have to pay them a fixed fee - their pay cannot have performance hurdles attached - and I called-pay-with-hurdles "incentivised pay". "Performance Rights" and "incentivised pay" are not the same.

"Performance Rights" are "Rights to shares for performing a task". At the date of issue they have a fixed value, and the quantum of rights awarded is not conditional on future developments. They have no hurdles. They are not, as you suggested they should be, "pegged to something like increased sustained Shareprice". If they were, this would fall foul of the ASX rules as I have explained.

"incentivised pay", as I explained in my last post, means "bonus pay". This is where the quantum of rights awarded (and thus value) at the issue date is not defined because it depends on future developments i.e. there are hurdles. Again, your suggestion the awards should be "pegged to something like increased sustained Shareprice" would make these awards "bonus pay", which NEDs cannot be given.

In other words, you can give them "a performance linked incentive component" of pay in rights to shares, but you cannot give them "incentivised pay" that earns them bonus shares. The "performance link" in the former comes in the form of good decisions meaning higher share price in the long term.


To answer your other points:

A] if you believe that to be the case, go ahead and report them to ASX/ASIC. I think you'll get short-shrift.

B] Read and understand all of the above. For the NEDs, at least, THEY CANNOT UNDER ASX RULES BE PAID ACCORDING TO PERFORMANCE MILESTONES.