They may have don't their home work with large shareholders and get an indication of the NO % (say 40%) of total votes against the 3 traitors, and confident that at least the remaining 10.01% can be obtained from retailers through their voting recommendation.And how on earth could they be confident of that...thats like saying don't worry ; we’ll win the local RSL lotto next week
AVZ constitution says minimum 3 but I guess the 2 remaining will just appoint another 1 if everyone losesThat seat won't be available until next year's AGM in that case - unless an appointment is made during the year.
We can actually end up between 2-9 at this year's AGM
Let’s put it this way -The BoD must be confident that they have more than 50% NO votes against the 3 #FUCKZJ prostitudes, otherwise it make no sense that they recommend Shareholders to vote NO for Res 2-8.
its there under the meetings tabDid the voting form arrive via mail or email? I've logged onto the Automic website and there's no information under AVZ.
Tell them you will change the superfundBasically what they're saying is that they have one HIN with all client holdings held in aggregate on that HIN.
You could contact them directly to ask whether they will allow voting on behalf of your holdings and to direct them in a certain way, but a lot of these service providers won't entertain it because it's too cumbersome for them to manage operationally, and they could just say sorry we don't allow voting on AGM resolutions (or they may charge a fee to do it).
Edit: But it's definitely worth asking them to make sure
Spot onLet’s put it this way -
(1) Everyone including Chinese votes against the reds as recommended by the board,
(2) detractors / Chinese do as per (1) with the exception of MMGA group; detractors pile in the yes votes for those guys . They also vote down those up for reelection of course
(3) you need over 50% of your votes to be nominated … all the red ones are dead in the water as everyone has voted against them … except of course for the 3 MMGA numbnuts .. Chinese have banged in the yes votes for those guys and most likely enough to get them over the line I.e. the yes votes for MMGA are greater than their no votes and we have 2 grubs climbing on board to occupie the two spots that are available go take the maximum number to 9
(4) if the ones for reelection don’t get through due to mass voting of No by detractors … well then that leaves the door open for the third at least
Pretty plain if you ask me
This is absolutely my thinking and the way I will be voting.So this is the question....
Do we vote for the first bunch of Noms to protect our board?
So MMGA don't even get a chance?
AVZ have not endorsed voting for them, that is likely because they simply can't responsibly endorse people for BoD that don't bring anything to the table.
It looks like the random Noms are nominated to try to block MMGA.
They will likely resign if voted in.
So should we? I dunno.
Yeah that was how I saw it but @GD4 says no. Doesn't really matter imma vote green but wanted to know what the possible outcomes are. Even with a 2-2 stalemate it would fuck the current BoD's ability to control the company and just having 1 there would still be shit so either way we need to avoid it.(4) if the ones for reelection don’t get through due to mass voting of No by detractors … well then that leaves the door open for the third at least
Same. A couple of billion retail votes and we piss inVoted as requested by the board.
Nope, that slot doesn't become available in that scenario. There are only 2 slots available for nominees who are not current directors standing for re-election.(4) if the ones for reelection don’t get through due to mass voting of No by detractors … well then that leaves the door open for the third at least
Same. A couple of billion retail votes and we piss in
Theres basically 3 groups here. Firstly the other13 will be voted no by MMGA and chinese mates and given our BOD is reccomending a no vote then highlyunlikely anyone from this group comes closeLet’s put it this way -
(1) Everyone including Chinese votes against the reds as recommended by the board,
(2) detractors / Chinese do as per (1) with the exception of MMGA group; detractors pile in the yes votes for those guys . They also vote down those up for reelection of course
(3) you need over 50% of your votes to be nominated … all the red ones are dead in the water as everyone has voted against them … except of course for the 3 MMGA numbnuts .. Chinese have banged in the yes votes for those guys and most likely enough to get them over the line I.e. the yes votes for MMGA are greater than their no votes and we have 2 grubs climbing on board to occupie the two spots that are available go take the maximum number to 9
(4) if the ones for reelection don’t get through due to mass voting of No by detractors … well then that leaves the door open for the third at least
Pretty plain if you ask me
Ye but problem is there's 16 heads to vote for, for 2 positions that are available ; so shareholders just going with the boards recommendations means it's an up hillrace for anyone in that group..but if Chinese vote yes to mmga crew ;well they’ll have a better chance as their Yes : No ratio is better than all the rest._all they need to do is poke above 50% and they are through the doorYeah that was how I saw it but @GD4 says no. Doesn't really matter imma vote green but wanted to know what the possible outcomes are. Even with a 2-2 stalemate it would fuck the current BoD's ability to control the company and just having 1 there would still be shit so either way we need to avoid it.
I believe that there were 3 vacant positions available at the time that Fat Tail nominated there directors. Since then AVZ nominated Her Excellency Salome Thaddaus Sijaona which is AVZ's right to do so as she appears to be an outstanding candidate.I read the constitution section on director nominations but am still unsure
I think my confusion stemmed from the 3 new director nominees. It seems each of those 3 seats will only remain if the individual new nominee is elected. So we could be left with somewhere between 4 and 7 on the bod. And only 2 of the original 4 is up for grabs between the 2 seeking reelection and the absolute clown car of other candidates with the current holders getting first dibs followed by the other list in order. Is that right @GD4 ?
If so then why the fuck would MMGA bother nominating 3 candidates when only 2 can get on the bod?