Originally posted by noodly
Certainly agree with your options analysis.
Directors have definitely screwed it for themselves by taking shares on a 5 year payment term rather than giving themselves free options like most other companies seem to do. I guess they, like all of us, thought we'd be well and truly over the line by now!
Anyway if they'd given themselves options they could have just let them quietly lapse, if they were out of the money, and no one would care, or probably even notice!
The way I read the loan agreements they could sell all their loan shares and the proceeds could then be used to repay their loans in
full even if the sale proceeds are less than the original loan (share issue) value.
As a side note the guy everyone likes to look up to as an example of how to do things, (me included, he struck lucky) Neil Biddle, was on the TNG Board when these shares were given out.
The positives from being issued shares with an attaching loan,from the directors perspective,I see as being 2 fold.Firstly it makes it seem on face value when looking at the top 20 that directors have skin in the game,when in fact they are risking nothing, and secondly it gives them votes,which they wouldn't have if their only holdings were options.In this recent case if PB had options and not 12M shares,the outcome of the GM would have been flipped.