PEB - Pacific Edge Ltd

[percy]

Not one cent eh .....he’s a truly independent director ....not swayed at decision time as to what’s best for shareholders (no gain for him) but decides what’s best for the company.

Really.....?????????????.
Bit like going to the casino with play money.!
Unless a director has skin in the game their contribution is worthless.

[Balance]

Really.....?????????????.
Bit like going to the casino with play money.!
Unless a director has skin in the game their contribution is worthless.

W69 is being his ironical self ��

[Xerof]

I note an extremely reasonable request for a 9.8% INCREASE in Directors fees too. After such an exciting and rewarding year for shareholders, I expect everyone will applaud their performance and pass it unanimously

[Schrodinger]

We’re getting close to 5yr predictions of revenue. From memory my pick was sub $10m so nearly on the money. How many went for the $100m lol

[winner69]

W69 is being his ironical self ��

Wasn’t really

The matter of whether independent directors should have skin in the game is regularly debated throughout the world. Can self interest (ie having skin in the game) not always be best for the company per se (sometimes on the discussion between short terminism v long term sustainability)?

Even the Australia Institute of Directors have a recent discussion paper on this topic

Interesting thought - some might say it is insulting to suggest that substantial shareholders who are directors cannot act for the benefit of the organisation as a whole....but it is equally insulting to suggest that directors cannot be trusted to do the best for a company unless they have skin in the game.

[percy]

Wasn’t really

The matter of whether independent directors should have skin in the game is regularly debated throughout the world. Can self interest (ie having skin in the game) not always be best for the company per se (sometimes on the discussion between short terminism v long term sustainability)?

Even the Australia Institute of Directors have a recent discussion paper on this topic

Interesting thought - some might say it is insulting to suggest that substantial shareholders who are directors cannot act for the benefit of the organisation as a whole....but it is equally insulting to suggest that directors cannot be trusted to do the best for a company unless they have skin in the game.

As an investor, directors' skin in the game is a very important consideration when I invest.
Has saved me making foolish mistakes.

[couta1]

As an investor, directors' skin in the game is a very important consideration when I invest.
Has saved me making foolish mistakes.

Yep, if you believe in the company then as a Director why wouldn't you take a stake? maybe fatcat Directors just there to collect easy money and don't really give a toss would be the exception.

[peat]

W69 is being his ironical self 🤪

Wasn’t really

tone is complicated with only words on a page , flippancy and sarcasm don't transfer well from speech to writing

pays to be clear !

[winner69]

As an investor, directors' skin in the game is a very important consideration when I invest.
Has saved me making foolish mistakes.

.

Can’t disagree in principal ....and as fellow shareholders we can’t complain if their self interest comes first

I was only talking about independent directors (not the big shareholder or executive directors) and sometimes it is comforting to know that a truly independent director (ie no shares) is ensuring what is best for the company rather than what is best for shareholders.

There are other things besides financial things that matter to a company’s well being

I was only talking about

[Balance]

As an investor, directors' skin in the game is a very important consideration when I invest.
Has saved me making foolish mistakes.

Likewise for me, Percy.

More so with a company like PEB which brings out its begging bowl every so often (with outlandish and misleading forecasts and financial statements) - if the directors are not prepared to put any of their own money in, they should not be asking other shareholders to.

https://www.sharetrader.co.nz/showth...ge-Ltd/page880

Here's an excellent summary of what the directors of PEB are about - gleaned from Twotic's assessment after he attended the AGM in August 2015 :

1. "His bizarre response to the question regarding directors not taking up their rights in the capital raise capped it all off. For some reason he went down the track of suggesting things could have been different if the rights issue had created some value and at the very least directors could then have had the chance to trade their rights....?? The whole way that question got answered was absolutely pathetic to be honest, including the chime in responses by a couple of the directors."

In other words, they have absolutely no intention of supporting the capital raise with their own money but if there is quick money to be made (like in the previous rights issue), they are happy to sell their rights and take the money.

2. "Another plus was their commitment to reaching $100m by financial year 2018 and that they wont require another capital raise to get them there."

Well, it's 2018 and there have been 3 further capital raisings since that comment at the AGM by the directors! And the next one (if PEB survives) is not that far off!

3. "..... they are basically all in on this KP user programme. CMS and VA cover still appear to be so far away no commitment can be given on any time lines. We are just "one step closer" on what seems to be a never-ending staircase."

So 3 years down the track and they are still progressing and one step even further away(??????)!