I've got a catch up with some people soon and One Nation. I am just going to ask generally on how can Parliament spend time on legislation referring to our PIOP and not have an interest in the handling of the BFS. Surely if any parliament which is supposedly so busy has time to do a railway agreement etc then they would want to ensure that the project is viable and that includes a BFS. People can make investment decisions on this information in Parliament so surely they should show an interest in the handling of the BFS. It's a bit of hope but you never know etc
Whilst I appreciate the commercial confidentiality of the BFS I wonder how relevant it actually is. I mean I doubt Rio, BHP, FMG and Vale who have billions or tens of billions or hundreds of billions of tonnes of iron ore would really be impacted by it that much or really care to much about it either. If shipped our 40 to 50 million tonnes of iron ore is only a fraction of the total iron ore output that goes overseas so I really doubt it makes a difference to our competitors if the BFS information is released. The only real benefit of the BFS information being released is that it might substantiate our product which might benefit MINORITY shareholders and I haven't seen to much evidence that our BOD are too concerned about us.
Perhaps at the AGM it can be emphasised very early by minority shareholders when will question time be and how long for etc so the BOD won't attempt to close it down early like last years AGM. Also it was mentioned at last years AGM that the BOD have a responsibility to represent all shareholders, including minority shareholders and they can't expect people from such a diverse background to fully understand the meeting procedure so they need to be clear on it. The Chairperson running the meeting surely has to represent all shareholders and that includes being patient and tolerant to people who are asking questions and who might not be explaining themselves to well.
Cheryl Edwardes with a legal and political background should want to be challenged and held to account as that is what politics and law like sport is about. People from these backgrounds if they are doing there job correctly and are genuine like to be challenged as it creates a better over all performance and environment etc.
I would have thought if the BOD wanted to do a capital raising that they would want the share price higher so they have to issue less shares etc to raise a certain dollar figure. I would have thought that a lower share price would only be beneficial to a party which might want to take out the company etc. Just my thoughts and do your own research and make your own decisions etc on what suits you best.
Of course shareholders who have confidence in any of our Directors can always keep buying on market
Regards
Geoff
