Roundtable Discussion; The Future of Mineral Sands. Watch the video here.
I'm thinking they'll be voting against the resolutions too ha ha ha!!!!
Voted - envelope posted. 32.5m for Rita.
Yep - don't remind me. Still feeling the pain my friend.
Just to clarify the protagonist position is that it would be a better direction - DEFINITELY NOT MY VIEW.
Regarding your comment ref there is no suggestion that they want to takeover MAGP I'm afraid that i would have to disagree with that. The legal form is indeed not a takeover but the substance of what is being proposed clearly is. Cutting off MAGPs head and replacing it with other people who will presumably lead it in a better direction is a takeover of sorts. There is no getting away from that - it's plain as day in the rhetoric being employed.
I get what you're saying but this challenge is being mounted from NTOG. If you're saying that the issue at stake is whether or not the remuneration package for RW is ok given the loss making state of MAGP I would suggest that NTOG is absolutely no different, indeed worse as a turnover proportion as I've clearly demonstrated. People who live in glass houses really ought not to throw stones, let alone boulders in their case it seems.
I think over the last few weeks or so a lot of mud has been slung. There are some who believe that RW is paid too well and as a result believe she is taking the mick with regard to the company, shareholder value etc etc. The miracle cure to this is to apparrently put in place 2 other directors from NTOG. I've looked at remuneration from my own opinion of mickey take factor. NTOG dir rem last year was 178k on revenue of 282k - 63% of revenue generated (not profit) went on paying the directors. MAGP was 453k on 1273k representing 35%, of course a much lower proportion. Now of course directors must be remunerated that's not the issue here. However, I fail to see how the accusations against RW can be seen in any light other than completely hypocritical. Make the revenue and take a higher salary. Current ratio of remuneration to turnover in NTOG is imo beyond excessive and certainly does not appear to be in line with shareholder interests.
No - totally separate document.
That's an excellent post dkw.
Okenia -as you say, 'arguably'. I'm just not interested in anything share prophets have to say, based on prior experience. Simple as that but I'm happy with my position. I hope you're happy with yours.
Still red. Too much hot air from share prophets. It's a bit rich for SOS to kick back and let them do his dirty work imo.
Yes clearly that is the cynical but realistic reason why not, probably. But one would hope that she and the board would buy some if their rhetoric of maximising shareholder value has credence.
Robsky - I must admit that I'm surprised and slightly concerned that they've not loaded up at the current price. Can anybody think of a reason why they wouldn't have been able to do so?
I'm paid to be professionally skeptical I'm afraid. I am employing the same level of emotive language that the likes of TW are on the other side of the fence. Unfortunately you need to get down in the dirt sometimes.
No he's not being proposed to be appointed director - just his daddy is going to use MAGP to buy all his assets at what I'm so sure will be an arm's length price, yeah right ha ha!
Family involvement mentioned in paragraph 3 of background of Mr Snead in last RNS.
Love how the criticism starts with attacking supposed nepotism when SOS wants to clear out the board and appoint his son in law to take the company forward! Maybe try to steer clear of hypocrisy from the outset if you want to be taken even remotely seriously. JOKERS!
Absolutely Mr E. Qinj please tell us the whole story.
That's shocking! Halifax send me paper copies for free with a prepaid reply envelope!
Apologies for that last hugely informative post ha! I was trying to share holdings info from the recently released stats to 31 dec 16. It appears that SOS has fewer than I imagined. The 93m is included in his 204m though he does have warrants of 36m. Not sure how the warrants work ref voting rights. Anybody? It also appears than Mr Wallace has no shares despite website saying to the contrary.