Well, I have to concur with that comment Plext. I dont like it...

Well, I have to concur with that comment Plext. I dont like it either.

But surely, this is the nature of the game DGR plays - we are dealing with fledgling companies,
ok, AJQ and ANW are now in the money (so to speak), but SOLG/IRR DHR? and the soon to be spawned new company, have no income, some entity has to support until Takeover ensues or production commences.
And unfortunately - that means financial support and incumbent dilution.

Have the directors feathered their beds with numerous directorships?.. yeah, probably
Do they charge exorbitant fees?, Im not convinced on an industry scale they do.
If they weren't fulfilling the requirement of director, would someone else have to? I suggest this would be the case.
None of these guys work Pro Bono, as neither you, nor I, would.

So I suggest its a necessary evil. and also suggest that the directors who initiated the company are well suited to be involved with its further development, esp in our case.

And for me the expectation is, that if we retain post IPO 25% of a company, then by the time it is self sustaining, or sold, we would retain about 12.5% - figures purely used for example.

and as has been said - Market cap is of most importance,
25% of 1 million, is 250K
12.5% of 5 million..... point and case.