Ann: Cancellation of EGM and Section 249D Notice , page-4

re: Ann: Cancellation of EGM and Section 249D... Hi prospector.

Like you i think it seems a little funny, and due to Vangold's concerns regarding the quality of the board i thought i would so some quick DD on the organisation and noted the following.

The image above is the top 20 list as at february 2013 as per the COY website. From what i can see vangold hold 8.1% of COY, but add to that the 3.4% owned by Stanley Yeaman who Vangold propose to add to the directors. i cant match anyone else on the top 20 list to being affiliated with Vangold, however, that does not mean they are not using HSBC etc to buy on their behalf.

I have also gone to the Vangold website and cannot make a link between their directors and top 20 ownership of COY.

The two boxes in yellow are the two COY non-executive directors. 3.1% in total. So negligible.

So at face value it looks like Vangold wont be able to push for control based on share ownership.

above i have uploaded the remuneration report from the 30 June 2012 accounts. where i thought it very top heavy for a company with ~4M market cap at 30 June 2012. (director fees were about ~10% of MC at 30 June 2012). many of the directors have since left which was one of Vangolds concerns.

Looking at the profiles of the directors, Boothe and Gannon have mining and science backgrounds which are fine, but Faulkner and Uldridge have stockbroking backgrounds and investment management backgounds respectively. Being that they are being paid a fee, i dont see how they can add value to the organisation especially from the stockbroking side. Seems they were given directorships based on percentage ownership? RISKY BUISNESS to be a 'private client advisor' at a reputable stock broking institution and director of an ASX listed company but that is just me with my auditing background kicking in.

Vangolds Market Cap is only $1.35M which explains their inability to purchase COY on market.

I really hope that Vangold and the directors of COY release statements soon regarding Vangolds specific reasoning for replacing its board and COYs defence/response.

As a miniscule shareholder i really do hate being left in the dark, such as only knowing about the $13M binding offer for the West Britain tennements only after the board had turned it down!

I havent been involved with a stock with this sort of internal turmoil before, so im interested to see what this does to the SP. so far nothing.

I dont have much financially invested so im holding to see how this plays out.

i know this is a pretty dead HC thread, but interested to know if others have knowledge of a company with this sort of internal politics, how it turned out and thoughts on direction of SP because of this.