I am glad you mentioned that fact that I was persistent in my posts on the thread, all directed at management but it was also different problems that I could see rather than your insistence to being told what is going on with the 249D.
Why do you feel that whoever is involved need to tell you what is going on?
Why all of a sudden do you have concerns with GPP considering that you are no longer a holder?
As I have been informed, I was hated on the thread for what I was bringing up - going back 10 years was irrelevant I think you said to me once, I guess it wasn't eh?
How sentiment has dramatically changed, now that EVERYONE can see the pitfalls of this current management team, including all the most prolific rampers, and yes it needs to be changed. I will also remind you that in your words it was going about it in the wrong way, "sit down with King" and discuss the concerns - done (soft bear hug) to possible meetings to discuss moving forward.
Positions on the board are a possibility if it is the best way moving forward for GPP without the trauma to shareholders by going through the 249D process. Honestly, things can't really get much worse for the shareholders than what it currently is, someone with business acumen, someone with technical acumen could get an idea where we are at with the OHD, with the amount of specialist consultants involved with the OHD project a person/s with the said acumen would move the OHD forward, if in fact it is tenable.
I would also like to know what makes you an expert to deciding who is capable or not? Obviously you have been informed of the "intended" person/s for the board, have you seen their CV's? Would they meet the business acumen aspect of a role on the board? Would they meet the technical aspect in a role on the board?
As for Kings holdings that are held in related interest accounts, re: Tregeare and Pandora, with your intimate knowledge on the Corporations Act 2012, are Kings holdings either direct (none) or related parties (Pandora and Tregeare) excluded from any vote to replace him? Like he is excluded on a show of hands if he is to receive options etc.
Finally, until/if a 249D is issued all these questions are really irrelevant, part of the process is the person/s selected to replace the board or boards members will be part of the announcement for an EGM, also in the announcement and explanatory statement will be statement letters from the prospective board members with their CV's as well as reasons given for trying to replace board members along with what they have to offer moving forward, it will be then and only then shareholders can decide how they would like to cast their votes.
Just FYI, the person that issues the 249D may not be seeking a board position......
Thoughts on the Tomato Trials - they never told the truth when they said they were in progress
Palm Oil trials - they never told the truth, they never happened
Mix up with the Oil concentrate - the professionals at Monash should be hanging their heads in shame
249D - bring it on
All IMO
Expand
