You should be very concerned about the farcical state our constitution is in.
According to our constitution when Rodgers made himself CEO he should have resigned as Chairman as our constitution requires that if the Chairman is not independent then we should have a lead director but as there are only 3 directors and only one is independent, the implication is that the Chairman should be the independent director. Jamie Cullen should have been Chairman. Why wasn’t he?
We now have only 2 directors not the minimum 3 required by our constitution and both are NOT independent. One represents the interests of the major shareholder and the other is CEO. There is a real CONFLICT of interest here and breach of our constitution.
Also by nature of being directors both have inside knowledge of what is happening here and by your own acknowledgement we are rarely updated and so only the 2 directors know what is happening.
Also the directors have acted negligently, ignoring the warnings of the auditors and spending recklessly ( $16 in 6 months) causing them to be unable to repay a debt of $2.5m.
Strangely have been unable to negotiate with Squadron resources causing the debt to now be in the hands of the major shareholder who already owns 20%. Another conflict of interest and real concern for shareholders and maybe would not have happened if we have had the basic requirement of directors and Chairman. Another question...Why did Jamie Cullen resign?
Now we are faced with a massive diluting capital raising and because of above if you claim that it needs to be done then these 2 directors and their families and associates should be banned from participating and both should resign as directors due to their POOR PERFORMANCE AND BREACHES OF OUR CONSTITUTION.
I am sure that ASIC and any observers to this total stuff up would agree
CTL Price at posting:
0.9¢ Sentiment: None Disclosure: Held
(20min delay)
