RE: RE: We must demand a dividend.... HT....your mgmt apologetic blather does get annoying....
We as shareholders deserve a dividend for the sale of a part of OUR business....period.
Handing McRae $100-150M to do so as he pleases is like handing a recovering crack addict a glass pipe.
The GW response to the AH sales announcement hits all the right nails squarely on the head and shareholders (new and old) deserve answers to those very relevent questions...like GW or not.
I recall not too long ago having to grit my teeth as I saw a halt to trading as our SP neared all time highs. Shortly thereafter, we had a PP announcement and listened as we were all told just how great an opportunity it was to have an ASX listing and that having the extra cash in the bank at that time was a great strategic feat. In the PP release, it stated quite directly what that money was to be used for....care to state how many of those initiatives were realized? So before I hand another cent over to McRae and the rest of the toadies, they owe me (and us) an explanation on where those $1.50 placement monies went......perhaps they went to spare no expense German themed Xmas dinners....first class fare to Oz.......self serving pensions...etc....none of which is acceptable.
I personally do not believe that divesting the only cash cow we have on the hope that McRae can realize his long in the making pipe dreams is a reasonable strategy. What makes it that more foolish is that Immunocidin and Sin Susto haven't even really spun up yet and those two products, in the short term, could easily increase the topline of the AH biz by 50% or more with a proper channel strategy. Selling now makes no sense. That said, if McRae can articulate a proper business case and come to the party with Urocidin partners to help keep us whole long term, I would be more open to listening.
However, I will never ever vote for the divesiture of the AH biz if I do not receive a piece of the pie. And a 0.50 special dividend sounds reasonable to me (albeit a bit low). I will not accept the argument that McRae can do so as he likes when I am a part owner of this business and am owed a payout from the selling of a piece of it.
Think of it as owning a rental property with a couple of friends. Does it make sense that one friend gets to decide on when to sell and gets to keep all the proceeds to do so as s/he pleases? Heck no......selling the AH biz is akin to this......McRae isn't taking my money and spending it on his self serving largesse......
The deal structure in preferenial sequence is as follows:
1) Cash for BNC and a 1:1 equity stake in the new biz (since I'm more than happy to stay invested in the AH biz for reasons discussed)
2) Cash for BNC and special dividend to shareholders of at least 33-50% of proceeds
3) Cash for BNC
I would gladly vote for (1) and (2).....(3) will never get my concurrence......ever.....