PAZ Pharma Zen

[whatsup]

In a few years time the company will have grown so big we'll have to ask Cindy to help us get a sweetheart deal for the Manopouri power Tiwai point is no longer using

Cindy wouldnt have a clue about any commercial deal, social B S yes , but commercial, what is that ?

[Mr Slothbear]

And if had not been for the board's and the ceo's bloody mindedness the company would have failed with the ChCh earthquakes.Full stop.End of story.
Most board members would have slowly resigned,for the easy way out.
Not PAZ board.Stuck to their vision, and supported the business through all the lean years,and when PAZ needed money to expand fronted up,when very few shareholders did.[Yes that is when I fronted up].
I think if Oliver had been a long term shareholder,and had known the company's history he would have concentrated on thanking the board.A great success story.
I would doubt NSA would represent more than 1% of the shares on issue.The owners of the other 99% are over joyed with the success the company has achieved at the board's direction.
And as we know the real fun will happen in a year or two's time.
Cibus Fund capital ,and their Damon Petrie becoming a PAZ director, are the catalyst for PAZ starting to hit top gear.

ps.A few years ago PAZ's market cap was $14mil while Sea Dragon's was $52mil,or $59mil.Offcourse Sea Dragon were listed and were going to this that and the other thing.
Today PAZ's market cap is $241mil while Sea Dragon's is $12.75 mil.....
Let's see what happens over the next 4 years.

Hear hear! Results say it all.

if results continue to be like this it doesn’t matter at all what exchange they’re on.

build it and they will come

I was very keen to come to the meeting and meet Percy and everyone but sadly had to work. Thanks for all your input

[petty]

Hey team obviously agree with Percy comments. Some other questions I have that someone maybe be able to provide insight into.

a) Lots of discussion about progress towards increasing production but not alot of chat about how they are going to get this sold. Seems to me that the play is build it and they will come. Aside from metrics showing the market size is growing what else exists to show that their customers are going to buy more?
b) I didn't think Cibus did a good job of indicating the value they are bringing. They gap between market price at the time and what they sold to Cibus for was around 30c if I recall (I haven't fact checked this but its closish). It didn't seem obvious to me that Cibus showed how they brought 30c worth of value to PAZ over other sources of capital that could have been accessed alot cheaper including from current shareholders. I kind of expected Cibus to say they had a network of sales channels in Europe or Asia that they could open up or something equally valuable but I thought they were pretty silent on the value they could bring. Anyone got thoughts on this?

[stoploss]

Hey team obviously agree with Percy comments. Some other questions I have that someone maybe be able to provide insight into.

a) Lots of discussion about progress towards increasing production but not alot of chat about how they are going to get this sold. Seems to me that the play is build it and they will come. Aside from metrics showing the market size is growing what else exists to show that their customers are going to buy more?
b) I didn't think Cibus did a good job of indicating the value they are bringing. They gap between market price at the time and what they sold to Cibus for was around 30c if I recall (I haven't fact checked this but its closish). It didn't seem obvious to me that Cibus showed how they brought 30c worth of value to PAZ over other sources of capital that could have been accessed alot cheaper including from current shareholders. I kind of expected Cibus to say they had a network of sales channels in Europe or Asia that they could open up or something equally valuable but I thought they were pretty silent on the value they could bring. Anyone got thoughts on this?

If you listened in you would have heard when A2 got a mention there was general laughter at the AGM. In terms of the demand I spoke to the chairman after the meeting and asked this . He said they have a massive amount of demand they cannot supply . Also they are not a one trick Pony IE it's not all infant milk powder going predominantly to China...they have a multitude of products into different markets. That product range will increase as they get the new dryers etc setup.
I agree with your point re Cibus , I think it will be a wait and see .
However as Percy has pointed out ,the board have a lot of skin in the game so if it's good for that amount of shares , it's got to be good for my small parcel.

[Sideshow Bob]

AGM Recording:

PharmaZen AGM (vimeo.com)

[Oliver Mander]

Hi all...thought I'd respond to some of the comments made on here. First off, I want to make clear that there was a discussion between myself and PAZ execs prior to the meeting - there were no surprises. We assess ALL companies against the same set of standards; it wouldn't be right of me to ignore some holes in disclosure solely because they have been performing well. No one would thank me if I ignored it, patted the directors on the back and said it didn't matter and then PAZ ran into issues.

I've attached a link to the report we produced for PAZ. It's a one off - normally, only members get to see it. We produce these for every NZX-listed company and the 7-8 USX ones we are covering this year. You may not agree with every statement, but at least you know why we are saying what we do. The positions we adopt are backed by evidence-based research or international bodies.

NZSA did take a 'gentle approach' in terms of supporting the two new directors - there was no description of their capabilities (ie, biography) provided in the Notice of Meeting, and we worked with the company to get some information published so that we could support those resolutions. If it was FBU, HGH or any other NZX company, I suspect most shareholders would take a pretty dim view of not having any information about what they were supposed to be voting on.

I raised questions around a few additional issues, however, associated with due diligence (meaning that one shareholder has a LOT more information than anyone else) and the potential workload of the new director. I was not the only one to ask 'difficult' questions, with one shareholder asking about the redemption terms associated with the newly issued preference shares.

I also asked some further questions about the company's new constitution, as I signalled I would prior to the meeting.

All the issues are relevant. NZSA cannot support any arrangement that disenfranchises shareholders - the new PAZ one does this by not allowing shareholders to vote on Board appointments. The company answered this very well, and I understand the context, but no matter how positive the intent the fact remains that shareholders can only elect 5/7 Board members. While director workload is not an issue when things are "sunshine and roses", it does become an issue when the proverbial hits the spinning thing. Just ask some directors how they felt between March - June last year. Had a biography of Damon Petrie been provided as part of the NoM, there would have been no need to ask that question. Again, Damon was transparent in his answer.

For what its worth, I agree that the Board and Exec have done a good job in tough times - percy, I'm limited in what I can say about performance, in case NZSA is seen to be 'endorsing' the company and runs foul of financial advice regulations. In any case, there were plenty of other people saying that. And, petty, if I wanted to 'grandstand', I didn't pick the forum well - asking questions when there are 40-odd happy, content and committed shareholders in the room is hardly a way for me to get positive exposure. I don't consciously seek to 'grandstand' or seek exposure for the sake of it; I'm simply transparent as to issues, as indeed I have to be. Had I asked those same questions where investor sentiment is a little less favourable, you would probably have been cheering from the sidelines - but that is a very 'ambulance' at the bottom of the cliff' approach. I'd rather highlight issues before they become a problem, especially when the company has a great future in front of it.

Importantly, PAZ have taken the concerns raised seriously - they were willing to engage and have committed to improve disclosure standards ahead of the next ASM. From a shareholder perspective, I think that shows the calibre of your Board and management team; that they can take on board constructive comment and focus on continuous improvement of standards.

From an NZSA perspective, I always welcome feedback. Drop me a line (either via sharetrader or at ceo@nzshareholders.co.nz) if there's any comment you wish to make. While I'm making changes in how we engage and what we do, the core principles I've inherited from my predecessors, in terms of improving the lot of retail shareholders, remain as strong as ever.

Happy investing everybody.

[iceman]

Thanks for your constructive response Oliver.

[Arthur]

Thanks Oliver, these are the sort of questions that should be raised at an AGM. Too many shareholders just go for the sausage rolls.

[percy]

Yes thank you Oliver,for taking the time to share your in depth work.
A pretty amazing company,adapting to becoming a much bigger company.
The due diligence Cibus did on PAZ ,like NZSA's highlighted areas PAZ need to develop:,systems and people to take the business forward.Mike Gallagher and Damon Petrie will add a lot to an already very capable board.
Yes rights issues are best for all shareholders,and I think PAZ did want to go that way,however after the fiasco of their last capital raise it was not an option.
Rather than having a supplier, NZ / Chinese Fund as an investor I think Cibus is a great choice.
We must also remember negotiations with Cibus started very early last year ,when PAZ's share price was [from memory] well under 50 cents.

[percy]

Thanks Oliver, these are the sort of questions that should be raised at an AGM. Too many shareholders just go for the sausage rolls.

Perhaps at this year's as there were a lot of people there.
However I know the three people who came from Nelson and Wellington have solid holldings.
As per an earlier post I figure the shareholders who were there hold over 50% of the total shares on issue.
Had the UK based director Dr.Wayne Burt been able to travel that would have taken the number up to over 60%.
Must admit I did enjoy the tucka.lol.