Based upon a quick review, at this stage I'm contemplating to vote no on several resolutions, including the following but not necessarily limited to those that I'm mentioning here.
Resolution 3
Change of Company Name
Vote = NO
I've posted my views on this issue previously
Resolution 4
Adoption of Conditional Rights Plan
Vote = NO
This is simply a preamble to facilitate Resolution 5
Resolution 5
Grant of Conditional Rights to Dr R Murdoch
Vote = No
Milestones are too soft and benefits are too generous.
If he can't do what is set out he needs to be given the chop.
Example - Milestone 1 for up to 33% of rights
Only needs to satisfy two of five possible conditions to get half of these rights... That should be a no brainer. Condition #4 = Selection of a new priority molecule...
Resolution 6
Approval of of rights to Dr R Murdoch on Accelerated Event...
Vote = NO
The low thresholds set out for a merger or takeover means his benefits are not aligned to shareholders. In my opinion the business could get sold cheap, Murdoch could get rewarded for a crap deal and shareholders get screwed. We could be left like the proverbial bride at the alter, a potential takeover suitor normally does so because they recognize the price for acquisition is cheap compared to possible pay back.
I don't want to see the benefits of my investment be sold off cheaply, and in particular I don't want to reward our CEO for doing so.
POH Price at posting:
3.5¢ Sentiment: Hold Disclosure: Held
A personalised tool to help users track selected stocks. Delivering real-time notifications on price updates, announcements, and performance stats on each to help make informed investment decisions.
(20min delay)