The elephant in the room here is how much change there has been,...

The elephant in the room here is how much change there has been, in the share register, since the last raising.
I would think that a lot of new holders have come on board since the raising and I would think that they would have a more positive view of the board than us poor miserable long termers and SOB's. Give them time. lol

I got the impression that the vote for Lynda's termination package was more to frighten some holders in to thinking they would lose her because she is fairly popular with holders, even me. I would think that a termination would result in a predetermined process under set rules. Again, I do not know for sure but in Oz there is a bloody law and rules for everything else now.

The loss of prestige for Lynda, on her first solo flight, would also weigh heavily on her mind I would think.

I do not know for sure but, I thought that if there was a second vote, and 50% was not obtained, then the next year the percentage of the vote needed against is reduced to gain a spill. That way it would run into a third year.

This talk of spills only relates to the remuneration vote and the rest of the motions can be voted down like the issue of options to Lynda, which is a real sore point with many, and, I wonder why they ran with this one as they must have known the ill feeling with the shareholders on this point, another pointer to bad judgement and over confidence.

I have been very vocal on all this I know, so, I am reluctant to change my opinion and abandon others who I may have persuaded to vote no but, I would urge everyone to make up their own mind regarding this remuneration motion. It is extremely important we all know.

I will vote at the meeting to allow the longest possible time to consider my verdict.

Lockitt