Originally posted by mg021
I was also at the meeting. Unfortunately I had to leave quickly and couldn't catch up with the others which was disappointing but hopefully next year.
I couldn't make the shareholder presentations in August as I was overseas so this was the first time I have seen Jack and Chris present. I was certainly impressed with both. Jack is certainly not just a figurehead. He is all over the science and strategy of Anteo. Chris's knowledge, vision and strategy were outstanding and I feel very confident in both. I wish we had Jack and Chris years ago as Anteo would be in a much better place.
Peter and Mark were asking very helpful questions and I hope Peter reports here as I'm sure his information will be most valuable to all on this forum.
Some of my observations.
Richard Martin voted against the renumeration report with his 90 odd million shares and this resulted in a first strike against the board. As the meeting progressed Richard seemed very happy with the company and its direction and spoke glowingly of them at the end of the meeting making his vote against the renumeration report bewildering to me. I would have liked to discuss it with Richard after the meeting but I had to rush. If anyone can shed light on this it would be appreciated.
The company could engage in more collaborations but they feel that it is best to focus their limited resources on the 2 mains ones they have now. They want to produce results and conserve the funds which seems prudent to me. Getting the results for one would open the floodgates!!!! More deals, more money more staff a scale up to suit demand.
My view about an eye watering announcement dropping anytime is a little more tempered than Semi's. An eye watering announcement is certainly a possibility but Anteo have a bit more work to do which could take some time. Saying that, if it happened quickly I would be very happy to be wrong.
To say my confidence has skyrocketed is and understatement.
All the best,
mg021
Hi mg021
I was puzzled for the same reason as you, for Richard's questions, comments and demeanour were wholly positive, save for that one reservation against the remuneration report. Also, he was absolutely friendly as he greeted two of the board members with whom I was chatting after the meeting had closed.
Overnight I recalled that the remuneration report covered directors' fees for the previous directors as well (I think for the first five months of the 2017-2018 financial year).
I had voted in favour of the remuneration report, because while I was personally not pleased to see such a large expenditure over that earlier part of the financial year, I was pleased to see far more reasonable sums for directors and the new CEO for the balance of the year. Now if the remuneration report had been split over those two periods, I could have had two bob each way - for the first five months "against" , with the balance a "for".
So on that basis, I don't think it likely we'll see a second strike next year.
As I think about the team we now have of the Chairman, two independent directors, and the CEO, I really wonder why we needed such a larger number earlier. Top heavy, I think. At least, monetarily so.
