positive outlook, page-24

Statsman

I see what you are saying. I also see Megans point of view as well. I make no judgement on her posting. I assume she is a shareholder who is disappointed with the performance here.

Questioning salaries and share price are part of the journey...and often they come about because some things perhaps have not come to pass or appear as they seem.

Personally, I have no issue with salary for anyone in any company if they can deliver the goods and be accountable for the decisions being made and be attributed with a good pass mark on the criteria/goals/objectives set for the company.

'All' MD's ride the rollercoaster. When its good they are great...when its not good they then need to be able to demonstrate much more clearly and precisely what it is they are doing to manage the, or a, situation.

In other words, its the bad times they need to dot the 'i's' and cross the 't's' and be totally accountable and transparent - as they are now much more under the microscope.

Now, we must remember that the more an MD gets paid, the higher the expectation for that MD I would have thought.
Fair enough?

In PLV's case we have failed to meet 'some' important objectives.

The share price is one. Not too many objective or independent thinkers here would give the company a pass mark on share price performance.
I think thats a fair and valid statement.

The problem our MD has is that we are in this situation 'and' the company is still sorting out the debt component/finance.

The 'perception' for some (not necessarily the 'reality' for some of us..like myself for example) is that the salary remains the same regardless of the state of the share price, the state of negotiations, the delays in stated objectives, or the credibility of data that underpinned the PFS.

I 'recall' (having not read it for sometime) that the environmental green light was aimed for and hoped to be concluded by March 2012.

If thats true (and please correct me someone if it is not) then how are we tracking for that?

Have we received further guidance or explanation for that?

You can see where some start asking questions can't you? We are all judged on our performances.

Now I want to make this really clear; this does not mean you expect perfect outcomes and results - thats unrealistic.

But at the higher level of authority and responsibility and salary, you do expect accountability, explanation, and management.

Its questions like these that provide an 'opportunity' for MD's to respond accordingly, and to assess their decisions and performance openly and honestly.

PLV's MD had an impeccable record of feedback and transparency and trust. These are things that can always be maintained in any environment - good or bad....but they must be maintained and upheld.

Its the bad times that determine the strength of people/companies/MD's and how they respond to feedback, how they respond to criticism - both warranted and unwarranted.

These times as I say are an 'opportunity' to develop trust.

Opportunities however must be taken.

From my perspective I respect people who work hard in any area of life to set goals, to achieve goals - and to explain in detail when those goals are not achieved.

Personally i've got better things to do than question the MD's salary - for me that isn't the issue. I think he has done a lot of groundwork here with PLV to ensure this project got off the ground.

Theres value in that of course and i'd say it was more than his salary somehow.
Many would safely say no Tony Schoer no Irvine. Thats criteria/reason enough to warrant some reward I would have thought.

That said, the perception of the market is what it is. This is an area that needs to be addressed proactively and strategically.

I have no doubt or questions over the MD's energy or his work ethic in securing the best outcomes for the company. So much of what is done we as shareholders do not see.

But thats the point.

Working hard and working smart go together. Making connections to the importance of congruent information and transparent information for any company means even the most disappointed or disgruntled of shareholders get good explanations and at least can see what is being achieved.


The market isn't 'getting this'

Many shareholders aren't 'getting this'

Why is that?

Whose responsibility is it to ensure we all do?

My opinion is more work needs to be done in effectively communicating what has happened, why it has...and why it has no bearing on the company or its valuation/s.

We should demand much more of the company. Circumstances dictate that.

But throwing mud at any MD's salary, let alone the PLV MD, isn't the answer imo. I don't see that as the issue.

We simply need to state clearly and respectfully that more explanation is required and more work needs to be done on the reality and the perception of this company.

I'm not happy with 24 cents for a company at this stage of development and with this track history. Who is here?