to me it looks like they have issued shares to him to supplement...

to me it looks like they have issued shares to him to supplement his income as part of a wage package. I can only assume his physical wage is quite low based on the market capitalisation of the business and therefore what they can afford to pay him. I also think the sudden rise of sellers at 0.1 of a cent since the issue is the same director selling off some, or eventually all, of this share allocation to get the cash he needs to supplement his income. I can only assume all this is allowed otherwise it would have been picked up by ASIC. That said, the whole process is extremely dodgy and a very borderline business practice. It also just dilutes the company even more and makes it even harder for the share price to move forward. This director should be just offered cash bonuses based on performance, not more shares. eg. 10% of profits paid annually as a cash bonus if the company is profitable. The more profit the guy generates the more he gets paid. That type of strategy would be in share holders interests as well. At the end of the day, small companies such as AFT, and there are plenty around , are just self serving. Directors want to get paid as much money as possible and then get out - couldn't give a rats about shareholder interest. They will tell you they do, but their actions do not back their rhetoric. The solution is simple though. Don't invest in companies that continue with such practices, or if you do, tag your investment clearly as very high risk, with an outside chance only of high reward.