I just spend another couple of hours to read those 89 pages...

I just spend another couple of hours to read those 89 pages again and it strikes me that I am probably too old to understand certain legal matters. It used to be the right to participate in a share issue at a certain price. Renounceable or non renounceable. In other words you could participate or not, but there was a price to be paid. Not in this case. Being elected you already have free shares without anything to pay for. Ok I can accept this, but why has this to be concealed. Would it not have been better just to say If the vote is yes Mr. Bouris gets 1.6 mln shares escrowed. Simple as that. This remuneration advise from an independant advisor saying that the remuneration is below common accepted standards does not sound good. Why not mentioning the name of that independant advisor and we as shareholders can ask questions. I agree with Madmarket that Mark's package is acceptible, but what about KT and WvdV. I think very highly of KT but 1.2 mln free shares plus 2.25 mln options and a consultancy fee of 275000 dlrs is a bit rich. KT's background unlike Mark's does not warrant these amounts. So Ken if you read this I would be happy if you accept half of the suggested remuneration package and I will fully back you.
As far as Willem van der Vlugt is concerned I have not seen a consultancy fee. This means he works for 200.000 free shs and 450.000 options. Thats acceptable as long as we know what he is doing for this. One of the other Dutch shareholders put him on the board (Not me)and Nobody sofar has explained to me why he is important for TZ. So maybe that should be explained at the AGM
Klaas