All good amg63.
And just to be clear, there aren't alot of options for Directors to be 'Incentivized'. 'Incentivized' implies some kind of remuneration on top of Directors fees. This can be by way of Performance Rights (Shareholder Approved), and other methods that don't seem to require Shareholder approval ie ESOP (Employee Share Option Plan), Consultancy Fees, Consultant's Benefit Expenses, Director's and Employees Benefit Expenses, Travel Expenses and 'Other Expenses', as detailed in the Annual Report (which offers no transparent breakdown of monies distributed individually). No where did I imply that Steven would be 'exploiting' anything, but rather if he hits his milestones internally, he will need to be paid (Incentivized), just like Glyn was; but hopefully this time around with necessary Shareholder Transparency with clear and concise targets/milestones, based on tangibility, in alignment with Shareholder expectations. Incentivizing Steven will be a good problem for Shareholders to have, as it means Steven will have done his job well.
Apart from Jeff and the Lab, everyone is currently part-time and paid quite well for their current exchange of energy by way of duties performed. When Steven secures additional (NEW) partners/PDA's etc, Shareholders won't mind him coming with his hand out. He's paid to do a job just like anybody else and will be additionally rewarded (incentivized) just like anybody else...in arrears and after he has achieved his personal and company targets.
Tangible Shareholder Wealth Creation and tangible Share-price Appreciation will be a good start imo, based on New partners and consistently increasing Revenues.
https://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20170706/pdf/43kgpvwl8y5g30.pdf
(20min delay)