Member Info for Pdub

Bless Beginerman.

Beginerman I am very grateful for your advice on how to behave on LSE.

Having given it due thought here is my conclusion. I would politely suggest that you shove it up your ar*e.

As always very interested in your opinions about BMN and I hope that you continue to express them here. However when anyone, including myself, offers opinions on a public bb they must accept that there will be responses, some of which may not be what the author wishes to hear.

I will continue to support or challenge opinions as I see fit and I have to warn you that includes yours. However annoying that may be it’s not going to change. So brace yourself for the next onslaught!

Regards. Pdub.

Thank you, Calamari.

Fair and reasonable answers

I get that Codejunkie and we had good debate yesterday..

Our views are so different on this that I really don’t want to continue that discussion as it is pointless. It has all been said.

Calamari I am curious about something. In the last 30 days you have only posted 8 times on BMN, virtually all negative incidentally, yet you have failed to comment on any of the 4 very positive RNSs that have been published in that time.

This morning you have happily engaged in a discussion about the possibility of a loss for 2021 yet not a single comment about the positive news flow through June. That may puzzle some (not me by the way as we have locked horns enough times for you and I to know exactly how we each operate).

So as any sensible shareholder should be forward looking I would like you to comment on how the RNSs on the 5 year wage agreement, the appointment of a tier one broker, the release of delayed plans in the feasibility and pre-feasibility studies for Vametco and Vanchem, and the announcement of funding for the mini-grid without dilution will all contribute to the positive development of BMN over the coming months and years.

In order to give credibility to any of your posts readers will need to know that you fully understand the importance of this positive news flow from the company.

Codejunkie “Up until proven Pdub. There is no performance. Groundwork yes. Performance....not so much.”

In my opinion that is so wrong. As I explained earlier a good incentive scheme will take into account a variety of measurable performance targets. The BMN scheme does just that.

Shareholders understandably focus on share price but if the share price falls (and that seems to be how AIM works) there would be no incentive for Directors or employees of any company to work hard and build a successful business.

Fortunately the excellent progress made by BMN during 2021 will probably be recognised by the Remuneration Scheme, which is why it was out in place.

Anyway a good debate Codejunkie but for me it has run its course.

Enjoy the rest of the weekend.

Regards. Pdub

Codejunkie like everyone else, including the Directors, you are very frustrated with the share price.

However no good remuneration policy would be solely based upon something so fickle and beyond company control as the share price. This is certainly true of BMN. Take just a few parts from the 2020 annual report.

This for instance:

“… As a result of the volatility in the market regarding the Vanadium price and exchange rate, RemCo implemented a collar and cap approach for the “consolidated economic profit” target. The intention of the collar and cap on the vanadium price and foreign exchange rate is to ensure that management are protected from factors that are beyond their control but also to limit the upside, should the vanadium price and exchange rate work in their favour.”

They recognise that variations in V price impact on profitability so have a mechanism to level out for both low and high V price.

Again look at the list of component targets related to the Short Term Incentive scheme:

“Short Term Incentives

Business Targets

Consolidated Economic Profit
ESG (all measures are equally weighted as illustrated below
Safety performance
Health (compliance)
Community (number of business disruptions)

Personal targets and Outcomes

Depending on the participant’s role, personal metrics and targets were set and evaluated with reference to the following performance categories:
a. StrategyImplementation
b. ProductionVolumes
c. ProductionCosts
d. CapitalProjects
e. Sustainability
f. Organisational Health”

Folks saying Directors shouldn’t get bonus because share price is low apparently don’t understand how incentive schemes work.

Remember the purpose is to incentivise good performance, not penalise because shareholders aren’t happy with today’s share price. The large shareholders will understand this and the pi’s stating that they want to stop any bonuses have very little chance of success.

Codejunkie much of that is speculative, for example we cannot be sure that “ they could have kept the SP at a reasonabe level by keeping shareholders informed. ” It is not an unreasonable assumption but it is nothing more.

Anyway for me it seems that what the BoD have been guilty of is being very focussed on building the business, perhaps at the expense of PR etc.

Fortunately they appear to have had considerable success at what they are doing and we all have shares in a company that has put in place the building blocks for a very successful future in my opinion.

Even the critics of the PR would have to admit that 4 good RNSs in 2 weeks is good going.

It’s an interesting question FD. If I am they owe me 8 1/2 years back pay.

You need to be more specific FD. Which company are you talking about?

I am puzzled Beginerman.

In the last 14 days we have had 4 significant RNSs covering a long term wage agreement with the union (eat your hearts out UK rail companies!), the appointment of a top tier broker, the release of major summaries of feasibility and pre-feasibility studies for Vametco and Vanchem and finally the financing of the mini grid.

These are all significant steps forward for the company yet apart from a couple of comments concerning the SPV (note not the success in arranging financing itself!) you have chosen to ignore all of those positives and instead focus on negatives such as low share price and denying Directors their bonus’s.

If you claim to take a balanced approach I find it astonishing that in this period where good news has at last started to flow you have ignored it.

So I would be interested to read your views of these RNSs particularly highlighting any positives that you see in them. I am hoping you can focus on the content of these RNSs not share price or delays or rampers or all the usual distractions. Just a fair and reasonable assessment of what these RNSs bring to the debate and how they may contribute to BMNs forward progress.

Thank you in anticipation. Pdub.

Thanks sammy.

And thanks to all those who have debated this point with courtesy and respect. Much appreciated. It is possible to disagree politely!

That’s all from me. Have a great weekend everyone.

Regards. Paul.

Sistersoffate please see my 15.45 answer.

The upgrade at Vametco had very clear targets … sustainable production and reduced costs. Very specific and fully delivered.

Sorry “Codejunkie…. “

Code junkies have you noticed any visible improvement in what the company has achieved? Sustained production at Vametco?
Reduced costs at Vametco?
Sustained production at Vanchem?

There are others but those three will do for now. Are you telling me that those very significant milestones that set this company up for the future should not be rewarded? Achievable and measurable… cornerstones of any well designed performance assessment

We will just have to disagree on that!!

Thank you Chipsndips. Appreciated.

Thanks Cindercone. I now have UCH London, Salisbury District and Southampton General Hospitals all trying to keep me going. I’m quite flattered really!

And Cindercone you seem intent on stripping the Directors of their bonuses despite the considerable progress made by the company in 2021 into 2022.

As a shareholder holder I am exercising my right to support whatever that package rewards them with. If the bonus is clearly unfair then as a shareholder I may consider requesting that the package itself is reconsidered.

I am certainly not stripping you of your right to disagree with me and vote however you wish. With respect that was not your best criticism of the content of my posts.

You can vote as you see fit but before any vote is it not right to have a decent debate on the matter? There have been a few hawks here wanting to stop the bonuses. I am merely putting an alternative view.

Just have to agree to differ on this matter.

To be more specific Cindercone it’s about fair terms and conditions.

In every employment I have had there have been clear terms and conditions relating to my salary etc. Probably the same for many here. I have always expected those to be honoured.

The Directors of BMN also have a performance related remuneration package. That should determine any bonuses etc. In my opinion what should be voted on is the terms and conditions of the package. They have already been accepted and the policy is in place. Therefore the Directors should be rewarded as appropriate according to the terms of the policy.

The company has made huge progress towards its target of building a vertically integrated vanadium platform. That should be recognised in the remuneration package.

That is why I will support whatever that policy produces in terms of bonuses. If people don’t like the policy then it is the policy that you should try to change, not deny people their reward according to the terms of the policy but after the event. To me that is unfair treatment whether as an employee or a Director.

Of course just my opinion but you did ask.

Why are you?