When?, page-192

Whatever, "Vincent". Fwiw, I've not once opposed your disdain of the board, lack of comms or progress - what I have questioned is your selective timing and rather selective method for expressing your disdain.

The fact is that I actually think most ASX boards become akin to a rort. In the case of EGR, I agree. I can't identify what John Conidi contributes other than draining our funds for his annual fee for "attending" half a dozen meetings and making an annual decision about his own remuneration and that of others in management. However, the fact is that his directorship comes up for rotation this year at the AGM anyway. So, there is no need for an EGM, which one should expect of a substantial holder. So, holders can vote at the time that is availed to us, anyway.

As for the lack of progress across our projects... EGR is a company that is not alone in that regard. Its almost systemic in the G-space. So, its not exclusive to EGR. Besides, each and every operation and aspect of our business that you list above stems from the unfortunate state of affairs in dealing with Govt bureaucratic red tape (in Tanz and Aust). The company has achieved a lot in terms of creating potential and an impressive business model but execution is proving elusive. It could just boil down to a matter of time - I understand in the meantime there will be angst and frustration from some.

I also agree that EGR comms could be far better... but to what avail? So that the trading fraternity/s that frequent social media and HC can sell into the news? It's the board's fiduciary duty to protect SH value. And, certainly keeping the market more frequently informed by way of updates could be a means of retaining retail holder interest but I'm not convinced that it would translate to a sustained SP accretion. Its more likely to result in a more volatile SP into which traders can make more easily sought-after profit. Liquidity is proving hard to come by... hence the shorting. But, if the US markets stabilise a bit in the nearterm (which it looks like they may be) then an update would benefit the SP.

We don't know the specific reason why management needed to submit additional information and why it appears be delayed. But it was very much part of the process whereby Development WA request further details and documentation before it is referred back to the CIty of Rockingham for assessment. Well, that's my understanding of the process after contacting Development WA. Perhaps it had something to do with DWER's invovlement... who knows? Yep, AS knows, so he should tell us!

I wish you would stop referring to the odd light-hearted post I make as childish. Because as far as I am concerned, it is childish for any reader of HC to believe that anonymous posters "divulging" their actual holdings on a public forum has any credibility (when the intent was supposedly to use the information to convene an EGM which has been subsequently retracted).

Good onya, "Vincent", though, for being open and frank. Unfortunately, company management usually do what they have to do for the betterment of the company's LT holders (or who they think are their LT holders). Fiduciary duty doesn't necessarily pertain to the truth... just facts and some fluff. Anyway, 564, no hard feelings between us, I hope! More action and less talk is what we need!