urgent - read this....ceo must go

The Board under their own Charter have failed in their director duties, the companies, code of conduct, continuous disclosure policy,Australian corporate law, ASIC guidelines, ASX listing rules...list goes on and have to remove Andrew Michelmore.


They have also violated their OWN company rules if they fail to do so ...read their governance documents and show me where they are adhering...id like to know.

http://www.ozminerals.com/About-OZ-Minerals/Corporate-Governance.html

and

Rights issue 100% Not the answer.

Rights issure destroy value, and administration/receivership/bankruptcy procedures are hugely time consuming, costly, and inefficient and destroy value even more.

Admin risk is probably low.....You simply dont destroy viable companies as the banks will be liable too. This would take 5-10 years to resolve in courts and PH is all but completed and will repay all debt pretty well in 2 years.

Between the transaction costs of debt enforcement, the delay cost of the proceedings, and the loss from reaching more than likely the wrong outcome as administraion 80% do, (a worldwide average of 48% of the business’s value is lost in debt enforcement). On average, the bankruptcy cases take 2.64 years to resolve. And this on a simple case (a downtown hotel), with only one secured creditor. The usual case probably takes longer, costs more and has smaller chance of successful outcome.

The banks with OZL are stuck in my view, they have to agree to a new deal with the company and a rogue bank.If the company wasnt viable we would be admin last weekend. The company is ok, trust me, its the company structure at mgt level thats is not. Wayne Swan could negotiate a quick outcome is my view.


Reorganization/restructure is the most efficient procedure. The main reason is that reorganization preserves OZL as a going concern and everyone does well. Its logic.

Reorganisation for OZL, means CEO gone now, some board changes asap, and new and deeper cost cutting initatives. Some covenants are good as they actually impose managment discipline.

OZL is an excellent portfolio of assets and is worth more alive, with better financing the math is obvious to even a junior analyst, albeit OZL with a vastly different structure than present as it lost 86% of value this far.

The Chairman and the board must act to remove Andrew Michelmore before he commences a rights issue? They have a fidiary duty to avoid that devestating outcome.

Its AM removal before he destroys whats left after destroying 85%
______________
By the way I only own shares, alot of them as i know intrinsic value and that the company is a going concern (its not pasminco or anything like that). I just didnt expect to be horribly blindsided by TH & S, the ST/LT debt wrong and horrible disclosure, poor information flow, non transparency, arrogant board failure to remove arrogant CEO after 85% lost value.

The board is liable here and the chairman must call the rogue banks chairman and check if they remove AM will it help faciliate the refi. I believe it will solve a lot of problems.

AM has to be removed for all his violations of Corporate law, ASX regulations, ASIC guidleines, Directors duties and loss of value for OZL shareholders. He simply is no longer qualified to operate this prized strategic national asset.

AM goes. Full stop. Company prospers. He is a shortable CEO and the board are now conflicted unless they remove him. Law suits are coming for sure otherwise.

Just my read...Im sure ill cop more abuse for being, innovative, bold, focused on ideas and solutions and positive outocmes and I.m 100% correct. I dont abuse anyone as its just not my way.

Wellm constructed arguments are a good thing.

Peace.