There are of course the negatives which tend to balance out some...

There are of course the negatives which tend to balance out some of these admitted positives and make me less inclined to vote the Directors great dollops of what is partly my money with their grab for shares and options to be voted on at the AGM.
Firstly, we have a business division selling infusion pumps and other equipment into hospitals throughout Australia which has gone no-where in the past 3 years. The margins are good, and the contribution is no doubt gratefully received, but over 3 years some significant growth should have been achieved if the effort was being applied. As it is it is barely a “mum and pop” sideline and the annual sales are unchanged.
Secondly, the Cardiocell patch for babies’ hole in the heart operation made much of the “no calcium buildup” feature and related benefits EXCLUSIVE to our Cardiocell patch. So our marketing strategy was based on what should have been instant and widespread take-up following approvals ….. but we are still struggling to gain sales, with the existing (inferior) patches still the patch-of-preference by the customers. If the take-up had been as ASSUMED we would probably be cash-positive by now. This lack of professionalism in developing the marketing strategy has cost us all dearly, being at least a year of catch-up.
Thirdly, the success or otherwise of Prof Frazer’s HSV2 or HPV vaccines really has nothing to do with anything the current BOD has or has not done …. So why should we reward them with shares and options as requested at the AGM?
Given the circumstances they should put their heads down and dig us out, which they are promising to do …. We can look to reward them as appropriate.