I agree with ddzx .... they are different .... they are the...

I agree with ddzx .... they are different .... they are the title holders of the land & could hold up the, as is, glacial progress even further if they were to take the position that the reason for the demise of their stake in the project was a direct result of poor management of the project (heaven knows there is no shortage of shareholders who agree on that point !!)
Which leads me to agreement with your 3rd, 4th , 6th & 7th points ....
"Their situation isn't any different to those who put in capital at 90 cents or in the mid sixties or at 45 cents."
&
"Azure are out of pocket at the current SP."
&
"A lot of holders aren't in the money at 35 cents."
&
"I think we all anticipated that these options would be in the money and the deal did seem fair at the time."

What you are acknowledging in these points is that there are a s-load of stakeholders that would not be happy with the how the project has panned out over the past decade ... Martu, early shareholders, placement shareholders, Azure & pretty well anyone who bought & are still holding shares (with the possible exception of the largest shareholding entity).

The market obviously has no confidence in RWD judging by our share performance against a raft of 'johnny-come-latelies"

And your final point caps the situation off to a T.


RWD need to show some proactive goodwill leadership here & re-negotiate the terms of the Martu options .... "to be forewarned is to be forearmed"