“...It has not one, but 3 major projects on it's hands...” You...

“...It has not one, but 3 major projects on it's hands...”

You are arguing that Tony deserves ‘major remuneration’ because the company has ‘3 major projects’ on its hands?

At the risk of stating the bleeding obvious, neither of Azure’s 3 projects are even remotely ‘major’. Nor are they ‘projects’ in the sense most analysts use that term.

The company is simply exploring two very small tenements. It has interests in another. It’s a ~$20m mc pre-rev nano involved in modest activity

To attempt to justify Tony’s salary on the basis of the size of the company’s projects is absurd and laughable.

Anyway, Sap’s sample group is Ok. I’ll have more to say about how Tony’s remuneration stacks up to these peers, in terms of quantum, market cap and sp performance, shortly.

In fact, I’ll probably use this same list for illustrative benchmarking purposes in my shareholder correspondence. (I have time dedicated this weekend to work on this)