Their options 1) 120m @ 1.4c exp Feb '18. The biggest chunk,...

Their options
1) 120m @ 1.4c exp Feb '18.  The biggest chunk, post auction, a celebratory gift to themselves.
2) 44m @ 3.2c exp Oct '18. Combined with above = > half their allotment in only 19 months.
3) 5m @ 4.39 exp Feb '19.  Insignificant, odd amounts - smoke and mirrors.
4) 6m @ 7.38 exp May '19. Ditto.  
5)  10.4m @ 1.9c exp Feb '20.  Ditto, but look at the radically decreasing sp.
6)  14m @ 1.62 exp Dec '20.  Ditto. If they do a lousy job they still get cheap options.
7)  70m @ 1.3c exp Dec '21.  Combined with the 120m = 2/3 at less than 1.4c.

Their rationalization
1) 'and to motivate senior management and directors...'.  Bull.  If their overly generous pay, which remains a huge portion of total costs and has been a significant contributor to the need for repeated dilution of your capital, isn't enough they can piss off.  NOTHING they do will influence the auction, which brings me to the ONLY NECESSARY PERSON - Peter Corr.  
2) 'to provide long term incentives'.  Garbage.  The board can modify or amend any aspect of the options including bringing forward the expiry date regardless of whether or not conditions have been met.
Therefore, for example, if Monsour decides to quit and focus on other interests he still gets his 'gift'.
Furthermore, see 1)
3) 'to motivate and generate loyalty'.  To who, the business?  We own it, not them.
Of that lot the only one to take risk has been Monsour, as have we.  We paid them to concoct this scheme.  We paid them throughout their past failings and inadequacies.
They can't talk straight to us.  They didn't let us know of their scheme until they had to. Etc..
4) 'to foster an ownership culture'.  Yeah, now that risk has been removed!
5) 'to reward past performance'.  That's a joke right?  Complete failure to commercialize the ASB.
Complete failure to generate meaningful sales of Pericoach.  In fact sales last dropped by over 90%.
The sp is a fraction of that in the past, as is LT holders capital.  Dilution has been massive.  Monsour is the only one of the lot to have contributed significantly to prior CR'S (and he has more than enough without options).  And there's the inadequate inherently flawed clinical trial, the full results of which they chose to keep from us.
6) 'motivate to achieve performance targets'.  What performance targets!  
NOTHING they do will influence the only significant looming project.  And remember the existing pay rate for these disposable directors AND senior management.

In essence I'm a fan of Employee share plans when used in the right spirit and I'm all for the ordinary employees to get a good allotment in this scheme.  Technically directors are usually considered employees but in their hands these things are a rort.  How nauseating when the attack  on penalty rates of the lowest paid is considered in contrast.
You can only gain by emailing them a strong message.
If you think I'm wrong about anything or everything please say so, constructively ofcourse.

Yours Truly
PeasantOne