stephen mayne

Hello all

There has been talk on Hotcopper that Stephen Mayne may/will make an attempt to attain a position on the Board of OZL or it's makeup if the buy out etc goes through.

I would like to make it quite clear that this is not a vindictive campaign against Stephen, it is simply a case where I believe he should focus on finding the right people to attain positions on Boards, instead of thinking he is the best person for the job himself. Just like a great mechanic doesn't necessarily make a great foreperson, or a great sales person doesn't necessarily make a great sales manager, a journalist supposedly standing up for shareholders rights in companies doesn't necessarily make a great director him/herself.

Stephen Mayne was a Board Member of People Power (google it if you like). The fact remains whilst on the Board what he touched turned into a shambles. I have edited below some emails (mainly so names, information not relevant and some private information etc would not be disclosed), This information is to help show that he wasn't interested in disclosing information to other Board members when he was on a Board, helped organaise a takeover which prevented other people from having an opportunity to take part in the running of a group, supported people who were not up to the desired standard to positions where they could and did provide him with information he probably wasn't entitled to and had people who he helped onto a Board push for a financial benefit payable to him (not necessairly large amounts of money), not to mention these same people REFUSED to provide any of these details to the only Board member who did not want Stephen to get a financial settlement.

To Stephen Mayne's supporters, whilst I understand he created Crikey, and also helped found a group to better represent people with mental and physical disabilites, both of which are intelligent things to do, this doesn’t mean that he has the ability to be a great representative of shareholders on our Board.

I met Stephen Mayne when we were both on the Board of a group called People Power. For the sake of this exercise I believe it is irrelevant wether this group was government backed or private enterprise, political or non political, profit or non profit etc. The below comments are to emphasise how Stephen Mayne acted whilst on a Board, and his actions afterwards.

Now when Stephen Mayne was on the Board of People Power he kept information from other Board Members and expected them to vote on issues which they had vey little background knowledge on. Hardly the behavior we should want from a prospective Board Member of OZL. Please find below an email from a Board Member who was on the Board with Stephen Mayne and I at the same time. This Board Member is a lawyer just like Stephen Mayne’s wife so you would think he would treat him with a certain level of respect. For the record the first time Stephen Mayne had any direct contact with me was when he wanted something (hardly the greatest relationship building exercise), and that was to throw another Board Member out.

Email dated 07th November 2006 at 8.16pm

I have offered my resignation form the Board a couple of times on the basis that I am very much not helping the (State supressed) cause and contributing marginally generally. Despite that I remain on the Board. In that circumstance I do not think it proper to be asked to vote on a resolution such as this (or others that have gone before) without any sort of background or explanation. Frankly, it is treating the non-Victorian members of the Board with contempt. I have always said that I am happy to contribute as my time and abilities allow but I have had enough of being treated like a cultivated mushroom. I will not vote on this until some further explanation is forthcoming.

After his infighting with some Board Members Stephen Mayne orchestrated a takeover of the Board to occur at an AGM. I couldn’t be removed as I still had one year of my term to remain. Stephen Mayne might try to deny this but the undeniable fact is that I had a meeting with him the afternoon before the AGM in an upstairs room at a Melbourne pub which was organized by one of his prospective Board Members. After this takeover he invited me to the Australian Open tennis (Stephen is a big tennis fan) with his wife. Stephen’s takeover group didn’t advise me of the plans they had of course until after the event which of course, was probably more by accident.

The following emails from a Board member should hopefully prove a few points.

Part of an email dated 28th January 2007 12.26pm

“ forward it to Stephen? (Strictly between you, me and the gatepost, he has to lay low for a while, but I've promised to keep him up to date)”

Part of an email dated 28th July 2007 1.18pm

“Firstly, why not resign? For the same reasons some of us got involved back in January: to stop poor old (name suppressed) resurrecting a moribund party and spitting the dummy yet again”

And

Thursday 19th April 2007 6.03pm

“And yes, the plot originally was to have been, 1) get control, 2) wind up the party, 3) decide on next steps. Somewhere we seem to have forgotten that”

To me it seems quite obvious that a) Stephen Mayne is getting information from a Board Member which he probably isn’t entitled to, b) this group had no intention of representing its members what so ever (and is Stephen Mayne backed), c) they had no plans in place what so ever once they winded things up.

Money Money Money

Stephen Mayne contributed funds toward the group as well as another Board member and numerosu other people. It seems that a major emphasis was on directing funds towards Stephen and the new Board member, regardless of the legalities of it, regardless of all the other people who contributed funds and regardless of the fact that it could cripple the group if this occurred. Please see parts of below emails.

28th July 2007 1.18pm

“Money: there has, it seems, been some confusion here. I'm no accountant, and I've not been over the accounts in detail, so I can only take the word of those who have (esp name supressed, who did the legwork), and I accept what they have all agreed on - that the party is indebted to both (Board member supressed) and Stephen for a 5-figure sum in each case (I've forgotten the exact amounts). I'm afraid that legal niceties of whether that is owed by the party or by the Vic election committee leave me unimpressed: as far as I'm concerned, morally the party is in debt to those 2 individuals.”

Please note the above email is from the Board Member who is keeping Stephen Mayne informed of things.

29/07/07 2.19pm

“Hi All, Thanks for your email to the Board (name suppressed). I agree that we do need to meet and sort matters out once and for all. I am leaving for overseas September 5th and do not know when I will be returning at this stage. So I would like to propose that we have a Board meeting, here, on Saturday August 11th at 2.00pm. It is imperative that we all get together and make some decisions. Please respond to this and let me all know what you think!”

Please note this meeting was made at a time when it was impossible for me to be in attendance as it seemed I was the only person against any payout (again not talking large amounts of money). This email is also by the Board Member who had a potnetial financial interst in any payouts. Please also note that all the other Board Members refused to provide me with any final minutes of these sorts of meetings or any information about the financial position of the group. My concerns were obvious as per the below email

27th August 2007 9.22am

“Hi Geoff,

Minutes of Saturday's meeting will be forwarded to you. (There was a quorom thankfully.) Please do not worry that you will not be included in all Board communications. I shall send them as soon as I have written them.”

I never received these minutes or any information about payouts or the groups finances (again we are not talking about the group having large amounts of money).

And of course this following email by the person giving Stephen Mayne information

03 June 2007 5.04pm

“must admit to being confused. My understanding was that, at the last board meeting we decided to:

1. hibernate the party for a time

2. write into our finances a clause specifying that Stephen and (name suppressed Board Member) would be repaid some cash

If memory serves, only name supressed and Geoff were not present at that meeting, and the decision(s) were unanimous”

For those who are questioning Owen's payout, which for the record I would have voted for but as shareholders rejected it don't believe it should have been paid, is Stephen getting some money through the back door here?

Now Stephen Mayne supported one individual who was giving him information on the party, was the one who set up mine and Stephen’s meeting before the AGM and was pushing for a financial settlement towards Stephen, not only to one position on the Board but two. This of course prevents other people who where not aligned to their group from having an input. Please have a look at the below email as it clearly shows this person does not have the physical or mental capacity to undertake one role, let alone two of them.

17th March 2007 11.12am

“Sorry it took so long to get back to you, but all will become clear. I can't recall how much I told you when you were here (I generally don't say much about it) but at the moment I'm undergoing a 48-week course of therapy. If it works, all will be hunky-dory, I'll be able get pissed as a cricket every night and I'll be after an outlet for my energies.

In the meantime, I haven’t got any energy. No exagerration, I assure you, it takes me a minute to stand up. It’s not the sickness, its the side-effects of the therapy I'm taking. (There's also the nausea - so there have been some pretty spectacular chunders!)”

And this person is giving information to Stephen and pushing for a financial settlment towards him and another Board Member. Whilst I don't have dozens of emails, I'm sure the above highlights there would have been a lot more talk between Stephen and his crew about taking control, not letting other people have a say, financial payments to Stephen and refusing to provide the person who was against a payment towards Stephen with any information on what occurred.

So in a quick summary – I totally agree that we need some changes at the top level of our company however it is important that we get those changes right. Stephen Mayne’s performance on the Board of People Power, and his actions after it give me the impression that he is not up to the job. He should focus on being a journalist and finding the right people to run for Boards, not try to do things himself. Whilst Stephen might be bitter towards this post, as per the previous information I have posted I am confident deep down that his wife (who is a nice lady) and father would agree with parts of it.

Best of luck to all shareholders, including Stephen Mayne (but just not him getting on the Board).

Geoffrey10