ridiculous

zzzzz1 your proposed alternative strategy has great merit. It is this type of mamagement thinking that is nhe eeded. The Bill and Ben analogy is absolutely correct. The shareholders are paying for two fatcats who are disinterested in performance and giving real effective stewardship for shareholders. There is "no" likelihood that rentals in 2009 will grow positively by 23%. Also, the NTA of the company is only $1 if you accept that the book values of the assets in the company are accurate. The recent sale in QLD proves that the over-valuations of the assets by management. If the rental yeilds are anticipated to increase in 2009 then why sell and crystallise a capital loss.

I sincerely support a change of management. I think that many do. This is ot a time for the shareholders to sit back and just complain. This is a time to lobby institutional stakeholders, sharholders, and get rid of the Bill and Ben management. If this entity was a private corporation Bill and Ben would not still be employed.

A independent detailed examination of APZ operations should be made and the management asked how they justify their frankly untenable and unsustainable position. I do not believe that we can wait to the next AGM and incur another $4 Million for the cost of Bill and Ben. Come on guys!!!!