Cham - my question, my point re. this release, is why is it so...

Cham - my question, my point re. this release, is why is it so ambiguous? Why release information that leaves readers with far more questions than answers?

OK. It commences immediately and will be reassessed at the end of June. But what commences immediately? But that I mean, who is taking what % of their wage as shares? All we know is that it is between 20% and 100% and it is calculated on the VWAP of the last five business days of each month.

But is it a static percentage for each person? Or, if the SP is higher or lower at the end of each month, can and/or will they change their percentage to grab more shares?

EG - if the VWAP in any given month is .3 or .4 of a cent, can they change their percentage down and take more cash, as opposed to if the VWAP is .2 or .1 of a cent, can they increase their percentage to grab more shares for themselves? Why didn't they use the release to clearly define precisely what % each person is taking in shares in lieu of wages?

Approval, they say, is required for Directors via the next General Meeting. Is that supposed to be the next AGM? If it is, then that's pointless because if the companies SP has flown up by then, who would vote for it? If a General meeting is to be called specifically for this, why does the salary sacrifice start immediately? This leads me to believe the General meeting is indeed the next AGM - months AFTER the scheme may have already ceased.

At the bottom of the release, it says if you want further info, contact HQ. Well that's almost pointless. If you ring HQ which I have many times, the people who answer almost always tell you they have nothing to do with QPN. And send them an email? From what I've read here and experienced personally, virtually none of us get replied too!

And as for contention that maybe they are hoping to induce a larger cashed up operator to pay for the first two wells as part of a J/V, didn't people put money into this company in 2012 specifically for this purpose? The dilution from this would be significant.

For me, the bottom line is why not produce a release in the first place that actually tells interested parties what's what?