Boy you guys are all a bit slow on the uptake.
"...Part of the rational behind the introduction of the 2 STRIKES RULE was to force directors to listen to and address the legitimate grievences of shareholders..."
Was this not a concern of shareholders last year and the year before that? Was this not proposed before? Here's a reminder...
http://hotcopper.com.au/threads/remuneration-report-and-2-strikes-rule.2122332/#post-12526666. Notice that the comments by the poster who most loudly and arrogantly rebuked jet07's proposal have mysteriously disappeared.
Anyway, enough of the rant, what's done is done (although I stand behind my last post in that thread
).
The real point I want to make is that even if the company is successful in commissioning the plant, the remuneration of the directors should still be seriously reviewed. So the only real use of the 2 strikes rule now is to simply get a formal response from the board regarding its remuneration. Its probably too late to use the rule to spill the board - in 2015 the company is either going to come good or its going to go into liquidation (its not going to survive another year of status quo). So at the AGM make sure you arm yourselves with specific questions and comments regarding their remuneration....and address every possible aspect such as e.g. why employing his wife in the company on such a high salary was justified at the time (there may be a legitimate answer)....if you reach the 25%, they will have to respond to those questions.
