The business is valued at one quarter it was 3 years ago. And...

The business is valued at one quarter it was 3 years ago. And even if we go back before the SP spike at around $3 (which by the way was the price they convinced a whole lot of institutional investors to buy into the company for a large CR) we have halved in share price over a 4 year period.

I'm all for long term investing and not expecting short term gains but any investor here has to be kidding themselves if they believe this is acceptable performance for the business. Are the shareholders responsible for this poor performance? I think the Board and executives need to take responsibility for this poor shareholder return. The chairman is the head of the Board. He has his finger is so many pies that there is no way he can be effective in his role here, as evidenced by the complete desertion of fund holders from this company. We have had 15 to 20% turnover of issued shares of this company since the FY resultsb(and considerably more of free float) . That tells what the big holders think of the business and the Board running it. It isn't worth their time to get into any shareholder activism. Just have a look at Monash Absolute last report. They held this stock for years and now fed up and just liquidated to protect their capital as their investment thesis no longer holds. Why should they sell all their holdings when the company has just made a large turnaround in profit? My guess is no confidence in the business and board/executives going foward.

Have a look at how many Boards Milne sits on and see what value those businesses have. You will quickly realize NTC would be one of his last priorities.

This company has peaked in terms of profit as we approach the height of the NBN. Now they tell us we need to consolidate and invest more. We have been consolidating and investing more in resources for the last 4 years. Where is the return on that capital before we invest for another 4 years and then hope carriers buy our products after many more years of trial. The MOQs they are signing with these carriers are pretty pathetic and the company seems ineffectual in achieving strong contract terms. Maybe why we have very few competitors - there is only small margin in these products. I would refer to them more like services as they are customized for each customer which is where a lot of engineering and manufacturing effort is expensed. Thus the minimum orders we negotiate need to be much higher and not subject to telco delays (not our problem) otherwise the ROI cannot be justified. The business cases for these products need to be better justified before they are embarked upon.

These are all strategies and decisions under the control of BoD and executive management. 4 years of share price declines is the outcome of these and other decisions taken by this group.

I'm not sure we will have enough votes to remove the chair but it will certainly send a message and add scrutiny to his performance. That might just take NTC up his priority order vs the numerous boards he sits on. Let's hope we get at least in the top 10.

As for destabilizing the company, I think the Board and management have done a pretty good job of that themselves judging by the funds dumping after the FY report. I also would have no concerns about customers being spooked as they can't get better terms anywhere in the world with the quality of customized product, pricing and absolute flexibility as to when they choose to take supply. Some are probably hoping/waiting for newer solutions/options in this fast moving landscape so I think it is very deceptive for company to declare that 'none of the contracts have been lost, just delayed'.