Interesting comment. I'm assuming you're referring specifically...

Interesting comment. I'm assuming you're referring specifically to the SESRP/SESARP scheme that relates exclusively to the senior executives, and not the MPRP/EPRP schemes that are open to more junior staff.

3.7m SARs were issued to senior management (KMPs) this year, with an implied aggregate grant value of $410k (split between 5 KMPs) given the SARs were valued at $0.11 at time of issue. The SARs are in the money only if MCE stock is >$0.53 in FY18, so in a case where management fails to generate shareholder value (i.e. get the stock price up), the SARs will expire worthless. But, if we put our rose-colored glasses on and say that MCE hits $1.50 by FY18 (an obviously very bullish scenario - certainly more bullish than i am), then the dilution suffered by shareholders (i.e. the real cost of the plan) will be: ($1.50 - $0.53) * 3.7m SARs / $1.50 share price, which equates to 2.4m new MCE shares being issued. Given there's currently 94m shares on issue, the SAR conversion under this scenario - where shareholders would have more than tripled their money in a 3-year period - represents a 2.5% dilution of the company's equity capital. My question to you is: would you really be that annoyed to see the 5 KMPs be issued stock representing a dilution of common stockholders by 2.5%, if that same management team had more than tripled the value of your equity in 3 years? That seems like a pretty reasonable deal to me.

In regard to 'lacking imagination' or not having a single achievement to their credit aside from devising a new executive incentive scheme, what would you suggest management to have done differently over the last few years, amidst the sharpest downturn their industry had seen in 2-3 decades (probably the sharpest downturn any of them had seen in their executive careers)? You have the benefit of hindsight, so i imagine you'll be able to come up with an extensive list - i'd be interested to hear.