Carlos Danger
Top 20
Just on the power plant or on everything?
Any hint as to what our significant compromise is?
AVZ Discussion 2022
- Thread starter GazDix
- Start date
Any hint as to what our significant compromise is?
TDITD
Top 20
Such a cluster fuck
If rumour is right it's PR05 now holding us up. Keep an eye out for a new watch on that wrist
TDITD
Top 20
Are our Lawyers in DRC invisible?
Christian Lukusa won lawyer of the year last year didn't he?
How can MOM be so unaware, it's impossible. Leads one down the path of sugary snacks
It could be tonight but all concerns will be addressed.
Hemicuda
Regular
Fuck me your full of shit, please correct me when your right
Winenut
Go AVZ!
You will stand uncorrected ad infinitum
After reassessing my previous votes.....I decided to change my vote for both the Hadley brothers....3 and 5 and our current board.
It makes sense to me, if we all vote the Hadley brothers in, there is not much chance that the 3 Zijin puppets will make it.....
Any thoughts welcome...
I am a first-time poster here, but I've been reading every day and I'm well aware of what's happening. A few days ago, I came across a post asking how to vote in the Annual General Meeting (AGM) if you own shares in SuperHero. That's when I realized that I also have a small parcel of shares in Superhero that I had forgotten about, even though I had already voted for my larger parcel through the automc website.
Recognizing that every single vote can make a difference in keeping the MMGA away from the Board, I contacted SuperHero. Below is their response. I thought of sharing it here, hoping it might help someone. WE have to inform them our preferences and they will vote on behalf of us
Recognizing that every single vote can make a difference in keeping the MMGA away from the Board, I contacted SuperHero. Below is their response. I thought of sharing it here, hoping it might help someone. WE have to inform them our preferences and they will vote on behalf of us
I wanted to address your recent criticism towards the board and express my disagreement. In my opinion, the board has performed admirably, especially considering the challenges we are currently facing. It's often easy to criticize from the sidelines without fully understanding the intricacies of their responsibilities and the effort they put in.
I would like to point out that if you truly believe there are better individuals suited for the board, you could have potentially pursued a board position yourself. However, I understand that board memberships come with their own set of difficulties and pressures, which might not be apparent to everyone.
Considering the significant amount of stress and uncertainty the board has undoubtedly endured, I firmly stand by my support for their efforts. I believe they have consistently strived to represent the best interests of all our shareholders.
Ultimately, if you find fault with the current board members, I wonder if you would prefer an alternative, such as MMGA, representing the shareholders instead?
Its easier to throw stones.
SilentOne
Interesting take. I don't have to be qualified or able to do a job to know if someone is delivering the results I pay them for.
If an employee does a shit job I put them on perfomance management.
If they don't improve, I replace them.
I don't take over their job.
I certainly don't expect them to reward themselves handsomely for it.
The best interests of shareholders would have included more communication and disclosure, both before and after suspension.
The best interests of shareholders would have included keeping their word when they said they would improve communication.
The best interests of shareholders would have meant reducing costs so we can continue to fight, but there are no communicated plans to do so.
The conduct at the last AGM made it clear the BoD don't consider themselves accountable to shareholders at all.
They are in this for themselves. Don't be under the illusion they give a crap about shareholders.
I support the BoD and not MMGA.
However, I'm not deluded that the BoD has delivered what we want.
We know the job is hard, that's why they get paid a substantial sum.
Accountability matters.
Nigel has stated they underestimated and didn't expect the amount of Government corruption in the DRC.
In the DRC.
That's their fuckup. They need to recover the situation.
Carlos Danger
Top 20
It's not a game of be happy with management or you're on MMGA's side. I will vote yes for remuneration to stop criticism of the board by our enemies post AGM but management specifically talked about 3 month reviews and cost cutting if no ML soon at last years AGM.
The auditor of the financial reports has brought attention to the material uncertainty of our ability to continue as an entity. Criticism of spending by management especially giving themselves personal cash bonuses without tangible outcomes is part of being a responsible shareholder.
Hodlandwin69
Regular
Everyone keeps saying we should vote XYZ to block the 3 cunts, and some are saying the board secretly want us to vote people in to block the 3 cunts. But if the board really wanted, they could have just filled the board to 9 so there wouldn't be any spots to fill, just re-elections.
People are crazy conspiracy theorists. (Unless I'm wrong and they can only add 3 people a year without shareholders approval, then I retract my statement)
Vote as the board are saying. No need to waste more money on more board members than required, and no need to add more opinions in the board. We need unification.
People are crazy conspiracy theorists. (Unless I'm wrong and they can only add 3 people a year without shareholders approval, then I retract my statement)
Vote as the board are saying. No need to waste more money on more board members than required, and no need to add more opinions in the board. We need unification.
Last edited:
"But if the board really wanted, they could have just filled the board to 9 so there wouldn't be any spots to fill, just re-elections."
With respect I'm not sure that is right, otherwise the BOD would have done just that, and put in 9 directors instead of facing this uncertantity and actively having to tell us to vote against the Fat Tail nominees. There was obviously a legal reason as to why they couldn't put the 9 directors in.
The way Deboss says to vote makes absolute sense, if you get 2 people in, any 2 people for that matter prior to getting to the Fat Tail nomiees, then they can't get in.
And how much is that going to cost I am only guessing, but I don't think it would be much and it protects our BOD if the Fat Tail nominees don't get in.
What happens if you vote no for everyone as you have suggested and the you get down to the Fat Tail nomiees and then they are voted in. Then the Chinese/ disgruntled holders will have showed there hand and may potentially vote against the 5 BOD nominees. Then we have 2 current BOD members and 2 new Fat Tail members as our new board.
Really not thinking that's what the BOD would want. I think BOD have to be seen as impartial but I think they would be a lot happier if the shareholder nominees got in over the Fat Tail nominees. For me it doesn't make sense to vote any other way, why give the Fat Tail nominees any chance of getting in.
If the BOD decides that the 2 new shareholders are not a good fit then the BOD still has a majority vote so no harm done.
All the best
GLTAH
Rediah
Regular
I thought I submitted my vote when I followed the "Click Here" link on AVZ's email.
But that was not the case,
1) AT WORK I clicked on "Click Here", (Ignore the name, they got it wrong, its backwards for some reason)
2) I entered the secret code, my postcode, and clicked on I am not Katy Perry.
3) I then filled the form for "Set Resolution" and clicked on next to "Confirm" and next to "Submit" and I thought it was done.
But that was NOT the case, as at no stage the website asked me to to enter my credential BEFORE starting the "Set Resolution".
So when I came HOME, I clicked on "Click Here" and went through the same exercise, and on the final step it said, "proxy Voting Form Submitted" could be because my home pc was already signed on for Automic, I dont know?
I then went to Automic website and logged in and verified that indeed it has gone through.
So if you guys dont mind, when you get time, log-onto your Automic account, and verify you have done your part, because I certainly didnt at my first go and in my mind I thought MMGA was done and dusted.
But that was not the case,
1) AT WORK I clicked on "Click Here", (Ignore the name, they got it wrong, its backwards for some reason)
2) I entered the secret code, my postcode, and clicked on I am not Katy Perry.
3) I then filled the form for "Set Resolution" and clicked on next to "Confirm" and next to "Submit" and I thought it was done.
But that was NOT the case, as at no stage the website asked me to to enter my credential BEFORE starting the "Set Resolution".
So when I came HOME, I clicked on "Click Here" and went through the same exercise, and on the final step it said, "proxy Voting Form Submitted" could be because my home pc was already signed on for Automic, I dont know?
I then went to Automic website and logged in and verified that indeed it has gone through.
So if you guys dont mind, when you get time, log-onto your Automic account, and verify you have done your part, because I certainly didnt at my first go and in my mind I thought MMGA was done and dusted.
I have altered my votes to include YES for Hadley brothers.
The BoD haven't been in control of things for 2 years. Why start now?
Or to put it less churlishly, we can make up our own minds how to vote with OUR shares.
Frankly, I've received more information and seen better decision making from this forum than I ever have from the BoD.
(Thanks to those hard workers. You know who you are.)
BRICK
Regular
I gotta say, resolution 1 to me is far less aggravating than what I’m reading on the MMGA twitter page tonight.
Gloating about scoring our contact details from the company as if it’s some big moral victory on our behalf.
It makes me really fucking angry that those rat fucks with their smug faces are trying to fuck us all over.
Gloating about scoring our contact details from the company as if it’s some big moral victory on our behalf.
It makes me really fucking angry that those rat fucks with their smug faces are trying to fuck us all over.
Stockinvesting
Regular
No, you're obviously right mate.
We should totally ignore the BOD recommendations and vote how some anonymous fucker, know it all, FUCKWIT, on a social media site tells you vote.
Way to go Einstein
Jesus help us.
Exactly what MMGA want.
Use ya fucking brain FFS.
No, you're obviously right mate.
We should totally ignore the BOD recommendations and vote how some anonymous fucker, know it all, FUCKWIT, on a social media site tells you vote.
Way to go Einstein
Jesus help us.
Exactly what MMGA want.
Use ya fucking brain FFS.
If people always voted the way BoDs wanted them to, they've all have remuneration packages in the Billions of dollars and they'd never be held to account.
I vote the way I want to, with MY shares.
I also acknowledged that I've receive more info from this forum than I've received from MY BoD, which is true.
I didn't vote for MMGA.
You don't know how I've voted.
I also haven't voted the way others on this site have specified.
I voted the BoD recommendations for everything except resolution 1.
Of course, you can vote at the direction of the BoD that fucked up estimating the chicanery in the DRC (which they are supposed to be experts in), and put us in suspension for over a year without telling us WTF is going on.
That's YOUR right, and good on you.
I hope the BoD pull us out of the fire, but I'm not going to reward them for the current outcome.
At the last AGM they treated us like something they scraped off their shoes, and now they want us to rubber stamp more money for them.
The saying is DYOR. Well, I've MMOD (Made my own decisions).
A little less sarcasm and personal attack, and a bit more respectful discussion and thought, please.
Similar threads
