I'm even more bemused by that comment than your last comment....

I'm even more bemused by that comment than your last comment.

For starters, there's only one Elon Musk in the world, and he happens to be busy building electric cars and rocket ships in the US. What he has to do with a $40m market cap, Australian-based builder of buoyancy systems is beyond me - to me, that's a bit like saying: "gee, i wish my suburban cricket team had LeBron James playing for it."

How would you know how much imagination i (and people like me) have? I'll let that ad hominem attack slide, and simply assume you substituted the ad hominem attack for lack of a coherent response to the two questions i asked, which in summary form were: 1) would you think it appropriate for shareholders to be diluted by 2.5% if management delivered a ~250%, 3-year shareholder return?, and 2) what would you have done, with the benefit of hindsight, that MCE management has so dismally failed to do?

It has indeed been a difficult time for MCE over the last 2 or so years and, as you rightly point out, all stakeholders (employees, shareholders etc.) have suffered. That said, it's wrong to say that management haven't taken pain and are simply "managing a few extra bob for themselves", and my reasons are as follows:

1) The Begley family, as the largest shareholder in the business with about 25m shares (or ~25% of the company), have taken more pain in pure dollar terms than any other shareholder as a result of MCE's share price slide. Indeed, having the CEO's family also be a major shareholder of the business is part of the reason why i took an interest in MCE - i very much like to ensure that the interests of the management teams of the companies into which i invest are aligned with my own interests.

2) Begley's total comp as CEO has actually been flat for the last 4 years - it was $555k in FY16 vs. $570k in FY12 - and the remuneration for other key execs like the COO and CFO are both down since 2014. These are objectively verifiable facts plainly available in the annual report.

3) Moreover, the salaries of both board members and key executives is going to fall further in FY17, as is plainly set out on p19 of the FY16 annual report - i've taken the liberty of copy/pasting so you don't have to look it up yourself:

[In regard to directors]: "Having regard to changing market conditions throughout the year and the Company's efforts to achieve cost savings where practicable, the Board determined to reduce the annual fees (inclusive of superannuation) paid to non-executive directors by 10%"

[In regard to management]: "Mr A Begley...agreed to a fixed salary reduction of 10%, effective 1 April 2016 for a period of one year. In addition, all full time employees (including Executives) have agreed, effective 1 July 2016, to participate in the Company's Flexible Day Off programme, which results in an effective reduction in salary of 10%".

I am not per se opposed to executive bonus schemes and the like, so long as they are reasonable in quantum and incentivize the management team toward long-term shareholder value creating behaviour. Your position, namely that "the whole concept of executive bonus and incentives is destroying what is good with capitalism" must make you rather unhappy with almost every single company listed on the ASX because, as far as i know, the overwhelming majority of ASX-listed enterprises (and even non-ASX listed businesses, for that matter) have some form of executive bonus scheme. Can you provide me with some specific examples of ASX-listed executive remuneration schemes that are to your liking?