Ann: Notice of General Meeting/Proxy Form , page-2

Hi All,

Interesting that the Board sees fit to see my now diminished shareholding, which has seriously been diluted in the last 12 months (as has all shareholders) as an attempt to take over the company. Yet, they gave our company away with ludicrous options at .001 to a select few for only a handful of $$ and won’t comment on that. Were all shareholders invited to contribute and benefit from these options? Further they know my litigation has nothing to do with the 249D – but as this appears to be the best strategy they have, let’s deal with.

We do all have our motivation and agenda, including me.

My motivation is; I am absolutely fed up with the mismanagement of this Board. Taking wages when the company has no projects nor income, lack of disclosure or business activity info, the ridiculous Cypress deal which would have seen massive dilution for all (a pitiful offer to us after 12 months of taking wages), when the SP was .16 cents they took over and now 12 months later it sits at .001, and let’s just look at how vulnerable they have left the company; my litigation alone absolutely solidifies my argument. It could have been avoided.

My agenda is; To remove the Board for the above reasons, to have business people with successful track records run the company in an effort to find solid, viable and self-sufficient projects which require no significant capital raise and to avoid Chapters 1 & 2 if possible. My agenda is lifting the SP – yes, that includes my partner Jason Edwards who has a brilliant business mind, can identify an opportunity and then commercial that idea, specialising in start-up businesses and revenue stream creation; check out what he’s accomplished in the last 12 months, compare it to this Board and then make your own judgment. http://au.news.yahoo.com/today-tonight/article/-/14776230/bully-program/ - This is a “Today Tonight” interview with Edwards on the new company he created in the last 12 months, all this while he is CEO of cBox, a company worth significantly more than MOT. Gerry Monaghan and Tom Burt, in all honesty I’ve never met before but recognize their business acumen through research and recommendations, and believe their talents are what we need for MOT right now. There are “no mates working with mates” with this group, they don’t know each other, it’s about what skills they hold.

The more this Board claws onto their positions, the more I have to wonder how much liability is there? What is waiting for any unsuspecting new Director right now … Someone does have to take the risk, get in there and find out or we’ll all lose.

IMPORTANTLY – All 3 professionals nominated to the board will take NO pay until the company is profitable – to clarify, “no pay” meaning no deferred payments either. So they get paid only when profits are shown. This is how it has to be, this is good business practice, this is putting the accountability with the Board and a share in profits where it should be, when it occurs and not before. A board should be paid on performance and results in delivering shareholder value only.

This Board can blame anyone they want to for poor performance, they can blame past actions, they can blame little old cBox for the big downfall of MOT, they can even blame me for the company’s current position with litigation. But in any business, private or public – when a fish stinks, it starts at the head. In the corporate sector the head of the company is always responsible and accountable; ethically, morally and legally. If the Board wishes to simply blame others and not be accountable, then they should step down immediately in the best interests of the company.

In my opinion, much like their very vocal, speculatively and largely inaccurate minions on HC, this Board’s response to the 249D has still not justified their disturbing actions over the last 12 months, nor has it addressed their own accountability for allowing MOT to get to the place we are now.

IMO DYOR