OBJ - Shareholder capabilities

Problem:
I see a huge amount of silent unhappiness regarding OBJ and its ability to function as a credible company, particularly in its fiscal abilities, its questionable board remuneration and its operational decisions, with an overarching notion that holders can do nothing about it.

Solution:
Demonstrate Shareholder capabilities by holding the board to Account: How? - Remove selective board member(s) as a representation of shareholder dissatisfaction. This will serve notice to the remaining board that shareholders must not be considered inconsequential, and that all the board can be held to account by shareholders at any time. Even Simply calling for the removal of one board member in a formal meeting may be enough to force the remaining board to re-assess what is in my opinion a very poor attitude toward shareholdes.

To do so - My Understanding is:
"Under the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (Corporations Act), members of either a proprietary or public company have the ability to call a general meeting of a company if members with at least 5% of the votes that may be cast at the general meeting request it.

All requisitions for a general meeting must now have the support of at least 5% of the votes that may be cast at the general meeting unless the company’s constitution provides for a different (and less onerous) threshold. Companies also need to ensure that any requisition for a general meeting is validly made. For example, companies should ensure that the underlying purpose of the requisition is a proper purpose14 and the notice which records each member’s signature is properly drafted.

Removing the Directors:
Shareholders in public companies have a statutory right to remove directors under section 203D of the Corporations Act by an ordinary resolution requiring 50 per cent of the company’s shareholders (in attendance and voting at the relevant meeting) to approve the resolution to remove a director. There are onerous notice requirements that must be complied with in order for this statutory right to be validly exercised.This right to remove directors is frequently used in conjunction with the right of members controlling 5 per cent of the voting shares (section 249D of the Corporations Act) to call (or require the company to call) a general meeting.This statutory right is not an exclusive method of director removal. While the section operates despite any other method prescribed, it does not limit the creation of alternative methods for director removal within a shareholders’ agreement or a company’s constitution."

In my opinion, finding 5% of the shareholder base willing to proceed with one or more director removals would be relatively easy given the very high level of dissatisfaction. I believe finding the 50% for director removal is also very achievable given the further dissatisfaction with the longstanding failure of the board to achieve any shareholder value. In short, and in my opinion, I believe there is enough support and dissatisfaction to remove one or more directors.

I'm not asking for a poll, likes, comments or anything more here. I'm simply trying to providing key information to the thousands of financially harmed, silent shareholders that you can do something about the rot in OBJ. The vast bulk of people who respond this this post are not the target audience. Instead its the literal thousands of viewers who hold, yet don't post - Your not powerless against either the BOD, nor the small, yet extraordinarily vocal( and illogical) base of support for the company.

In terms of Next steps - I have yet to make a decision if I will begin this process and begin a path to attempting director removal myself. For those of you who feel it is the correct path and should be undertaken sooner rather than later, you do NOT need to wait for me or anyone else..Anyone who is so inclined my begin the process fore removal of director(s).

My sentiment is Hold and Held, as there is no other alternative for shareholders at the time of this posting.