Further to the above post, I would like to address the inspiration behind dredging up the past; apart from the GSK/Voltaren - No Mess Applicator relationship that some are hopeful for. This post is best read in it's entirety from a PC or tablet so you get the opportunity to open the documents and read them for yourself.
This morning I received a text message from a friend who asked the following:
'Dredging up old performance milestones that were never met? What's your conspiracy theory? Spit it out.' This text message came from a very intelligent person and it troubles me deeply, as it demonstrates exactly how easily some of us (even the smart ones) remain in a state of amnesia and often times are too lazy to check the facts or even want to remember what actually happened. The majority of those initial Performance Milestones were indeed hit and claimed, as have many, many other Performance Milestones (PM) been hit and claimed since.
To begin, there is no 'conspiracy theory', just the facts.
The OBJ Shareholders of the time approved the OBJ BoD's first 3 Performance Milestones as follows:
View attachment 1180941
The above performance milestone or Class A Shares were awarded on 09/03/2005:
https://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20050309/pdf/3q28bstnjxcgm.pdf
https://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20050411/pdf/3qg2vh8hytvyy.pdf
That's right folks, you heard it here first; the OBJ Shareholders of the time approved this PM on the basis of 'proof of
mobilisation of a commercially significant compound'? So it had to be for Prilocaine or Ligocaine, as OBJ used the word '
mobilised' which matches the criteria?:
View attachment 1181052
https://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20050209/pdf/3pnrh1zvvmx6t.pdf
But in the end it looks like the winner was Tetracaine as per below. Not that it matters who the winner was, as none of the eventually 12 tested 'commercially significant' compounds ever became 'commercially significant' for OBJ Shareholders...only for the BoD:
https://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20061207/pdf/31008146gp2s5q.pdf
View attachment 1181142
The above second Performance Milestone or Class B Shares, were awarded on 03/01/2007 with no fan fanfare at all, no formal announcement was made as with the first milestone which stated
'Appendix 3B - Conversion of Class A Shares'......just a simple 3Y outlining the transfer of 49 million shares for doing a test that they were already being paid to do by Shareholders:
View attachment 1181277
https://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20070104/pdf/310dfs8ynt7t40.pdf
The trial consisted of
View attachment 1181148
The above 3rd milestone was not met.
https://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20090629/pdf/31j9mb15fmqvv3.pdf
IMO, the above three performance milestones were carefully planned and executed, as were all subsequent performance milestones. Create two ridiculously easy to achieve milestones that are already pre-planned and in the bag and mix with one very ambitious milestone that would be very nice, but most likely unachievable...sound familiar?
You start to see how these performance milestones from the very beginning were designed in a particular manner, where usually the first two are achievable, but the 3rd always just out of reach. A bit like hearing hard luck stories of directors painfully having to live out of their suitcases and enduring the hardships of 5 star accommodation and travel or having to sell a house to keep the dream alive. Just to set the record straight about Jeff having to sell his home to keep the dream alive...I am unsure as to the accuracy of this assertion which I believe came from a Hotcopper poster/news article. A little further digging of old announcements shows us that Jeff actually sold a large parcel of shares for a total of $980,000 or 14 million shares, a little after 12 months of joining the board. Before anybody tries to tell me it was an off-market transfer to himself etc, please bear in mind that directors often do 'off-market' transfers and it doesn't necessarily mean they are transferring it to their super. In this case, the amount at the time would have been too large anyway for a one-off super contribution and brokers often have buyers lined up for directors who are selling portions of their shares. So if he did have to sell his house prior to keep the dream alive, no doubt he was quickly able to re-start that house dream, as a million dollars back then would have bought him beach front property at Cottesloe Beach or a house next door to Rose Hancock:
https://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20051222/pdf/3tw4pvfkltb7k.pdf
14 years ago, OBJ put an announcement out that it's Tech has a 100 fold increase in transdermal delivery of Naltrexone...100 fold increase! Why isn't anybody out there interested in this remarkable feat?:
https://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20051205/pdf/3tlvj7y5x304m.pdf
Why hasn't anybody taken up ETP, OBJ's flagship tech platform?
These are valid and critical questions that I would really like a clear and concise answer to after nearly a decade and a half.
So the very first original Milestones A & B were not only approved & paid for by OBJ Shareholders, along with the salaries and option deals, but they were also a psychological precedent that were strategically set imo as the beginnings of many more of the same types of supposed performance milestones that were destined to befall OBJ Shareholders...knowingly or unknowingly to us. They received their salaries, their options, their performance milestones, their travel allowances. They sold at historical highs as only they could, looking from the inside out. They have only effectively purchased shares of any significance once, when OBJ's share-price was at it's historical low of around half a cent by way of a Non-Renounceable Rights issue which included (3 shares for every 10 shares held + a free 1 cent option - remember, these were the options that got extended another 3 times) where again they did very well from this situation as they had already nicely accumulated alot of free performance options, which ensured they got lots of more freebies. To participate in this Non-Renounceable CR made perfect sense at half a cent with another freebie option allocation based on the amount of shares you held - especially when you have just given yourself a crap-load of them...labouring the point, but you catch my drift:
https://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20081203/pdf/31f0r0h7wzf0zt.pdf
As Shareholders we have a responsibility to not continue to make the same mistakes of approving weak, wishy washy & commercially insignificant Performance Milestones. Yes, it is we Shareholders that are responsible for approving these Performance Milestones in the first place. I am sure most of us will be reserving our judgement until OBJ's new BoD propose any new Performance Milestones and this goes without saying that they deserve the benefit of doubt; but it is inevitable that there will be more PM's put forward by the new BoD. What I am highlighting here is that OBJ Shareholder's can no longer afford to remain in a state of amnesia with reference to the many sets of past non-commercially significant Performance Milestones and OBJ Shareholders can no longer afford to approve Performance Milestones that only serve to line the pockets of those at the helm of the company for non-commercially significant events. As Shareholders, we Must learn from our predecessors and ensure that clear, concise and commercially pertinent Milestones are agreed upon, when and where the issue is raised. I'm not saying history will repeat. I'm saying that it is our job to send OBJ's new BoD a clear message that we will make sure history DOES NOT repeat and for them to think long and hard before compiling any new PM requests. We at least owe this gesture of intelligent and informed decision-making to
ourselves this time around. They can only get performance milestones if we the owners of the company...the Shareholders, agree to them. Otherwise they already have enough money of their own to purchase shares ON-MARKET.
(20min delay)