If a poll is taken then the decision on a resolution is determined by counting the actual votes (i.e., number of shares) – for and against – held by shareholders physically present in person at the meeting and represented by proxies present at the meeting.
What concerns me most is that there were not enough votes (shares) by shareholders
physically present at the meeting or by proxies to outvote the 19+% held by M&A Advisory Pty Ltd and their mates.
Furthermore, I don't understand how proxy votes were handled in relation to the poll. I voted by proxy on the specific resolutions given to us months ago; I obviously was not asked how I wished to vote on this poll. Even though the chairman acts as my proxy, I assume he only has the legal right to vote on my behalf on the previous resolutions *and* in the way I told him to vote. Does he also have the legal right to vote on a new poll that we know nothing about until the day of the meeting, and to vote in whichever way he wishes to? Or does he not have that legal right, in which case all the proxy votes that were cast to date must be ignored (because the chairman does not know how we wish to vote on the poll), meaning that only the votes of shareholders physically present are counted? There are huge implications either way to answering yes or no to the above questions.
Seems to me M&A might keep playing the meeting postponement game (via polls) until they have enough votes to roll the board.
MEL Price at posting:
5.4¢ Sentiment: Buy Disclosure: Held
