Search results

I said the majority of shareholders, as currently represented by the Board. The Board has said they have received feedback from shareholders and their decision is based on what they believe the majority of shareholders want. Gina is perfectly entitled to contest this at an AGM and test...

This is not correct. She can only sit on the board if a majority of shareholders agree to it. Currently it would seem that the majority of shareholders do not agree to it due to concerns her interests are not aligned with theirs. This would appear to be a reasonable concern given her...

With under 20% of the company I'm not convinced she should have any seats. 80% of the shareholders wish to run this company in a commercial manner. It is highly likely Gina wishes to run it to prosecute her mining interests instead - this is all just spare change for her. She should be forced...

I suspect a good deal of the concern is related to many people's idea that mainstream media is "independent" and giving them "unbiased" reporting of the facts. Of course that has never been the case for privately owned media companies. There have been times when that fact was easier to hide...