The Purge, page-6

Good post amg, it's the only constructive thread I've read since the call that made me feel the need to reply

What we have seen yesterday by Mr Schapera is a clear readjustment of shareholder immediate  expectations, which to be frank should have been set 3 years ago. There were obvious signs that SS didn't agree with how the company was managed in the past by stating  "I can't comment on statements made in the past by others" which is kind & professional jargon for "don't blame me for my joke of a predecessor's screw ups, I'm only trying to steer the ship back on course now".

Finally, we had a statement that acknowledged past, poor shareholder communications and the prehistoric website and as a result we should see progress and a clear improvement on both of these fronts soon.

First order of business for SS has clearly been structuring the company and setting tangible business units, probably to measure growth and be able to have clear lines of reporting and roles & responsibilities in each sector eventually. It's not a coincidence shortly after his appointment that BodyGuard was split into two different entities (BodyGuard and BodyCare) and the renegotation of the Wave I tech, presumably to do something meaningful with it in one of the five business units.

Until yesterday I was convinced that SS would be the new permanent chairman, but he did make a comment that he is not staying in the role long term, at least that's how I interpreted his tone - that it wasn't even a possibility. However, I'd love to see OBJ bring on a former director/board member that Steve worked with during his time at BECCA. To me that would be the perfect evidence they can see similarities in potential and working partnership/style can pick up where they left off.

If he is not going to be the next chairman, then he has done a great job of realigning shareholder expectations ahead of the new chairman and possibly absorbed all of the negative reactions/responses, so that the new chairman can have a neutral/positive/fresh start without upsetting anybody by being the "bad guy" and having to be the one to realign shareholder expectations (which should have been done years ago).

The last point I will make is that us shareholders on here have a (mostly bad) tendency to single out individual phrases or statements and hone in on them and eventually treat them as gospel, when they are more or less just off the cuff remarks. We have to be careful not to play Chinese whispers with some of these comments.

For example:

- SS did not say yesterday we will get dividends by 2023.
He said in his personal vision he would love to say OBJ paying a sustainable dividend to shareholders within 5 years

- SS did not say yesterday that we won't receive substantial increased revenues this year.
He said shareholders should not expect significant revenue increases and that we should take a conservative view. It's just a sensible under-promise, over-deliver statement to make. Of course we will see revenue increases this year due to Magnemasks and CellScience ranges being sold, but it's madness for a board member to say "yes, shareholders should expect "substantial" revenue increases"

- SS did not say yesterday that we will be cashflow positive in 2018.
He said based on revenue forecasts/information provided by P&G that we hope to be cashflow positive later this year.

- SS did not say yesterday that the sole reason for the delay to sign the board member was due to negative HotCopper posts.
He said this task (to recruit) is not being made "any easier" by shareholders on the HC forum and that we should be mindful of this. He further explained by saying each person researches the company online and invariably come across the negative posts and quoted one response he received as being "it's a hornets nest" to substantiate his comment.

- SS did not say yesterday that the sole reason for shareprice depreciation are negative posts on the HotCopper posts.
He said there can be no explanation for this based on sound, valuation metrics, so it's currently down to supply & demand and the current price is down to what a buyer is prepared to pay.

He then gave an analogy to say if he put a sign out the front of his house to publicly reveal an array of problems with his house & neighbors, lack of parking etc., and asked the question, what do you think this would do to the sale price of his home?

He then went on to say that every institutional investor that he has spoken to with the view of investing in OBJ see current shareholder sentiment as the reason for the current low price and steers clear. (that's the feedback from the institutional investors, not his personal opinion).

He then said his personal opinion is that share price can be driven down as much as up by comments/sentiment on HC and at the moment it doesn't look pretty.

In hindsight, I think the last comment could have been left out, as he already made his point for us to be more aware of  the public impressions we are leaving and what kind of picture is painted when somebody searches for "OBJ" in google to research the company. Invariably they will stumble across the HC forum and if there are clear, visible negative hornets on display then it can make potential board members or institutional investors think twice as investing their time/money, particularly if they have other options of companies to join or invest their dollars into.

Earlier in the call, SS stated "I can't comment on statements made in the past by others" and I think his only mistake in the call yesterday was not to reiterate this statement again at this point of the call to indirectly/cheekily acknowledge that mistakes were made in the past by previous management which has also contributed to the share price decline, and because he didn't do this - some shareholders have gotten the impression that he blames negative HC sentiment only, which wasn't the case in my opinion.

Anyway, my point in the last few paragraphs is not to put words in his mouth and stick to what he actually said, which were all very broad, conservative and sensible statements in general