Geodrill Limited T.GEO

Great Q1 results, but what trickles down to shareholders ?

[shareholders1]

GEO operates in $US,(incluidng very generous US$ management remuneration)  but after years of debate decides to pay just a 2c dividend - in $Cdn !

CEO owns 40%, but on March 15, 420,000 options awarded. Is an option incentive even required or appropriate if the CEO already owns 40%?!  Another 270,000 options also issued (90k each to 3). Not to mention the issues associated with pricing and thus option pricing  of a thinly traded stock.

Query - on March 15, 2021 when the options were priced (16 days before the quarter end)  did GEO really have no clue that Q1 revenue would be a blow out? 

What is left for shareholdlers after very generous compnesation and dilution?

Any idea of why about 9m votes withheld re 2 of 4 directors? If not for the CEO's votes, the 2 directors would have turfed out.  Message here. What is it?

[Cranium]

GEO had a little over 42 million shares out 10yrs ago and has a little over 44 million out now, so it's harldly been a dilutive stock over the years.  The stock hae been flat over that timeframe, but it has fared better than other drillers and the set up now looks great if the cycle can continue for a couple more years. They have been promising a dividend for some time, but I think they

[shareholders1]

Options dilution - for just the 5 executives on page 10 of 2021 Circular, just the options listed total 2.796m.  Add 690k for ones issued March 15, 2021 and total becomes 3.486m. This does not include director and other employee options. Just the DIrector options on Page 16 total 527.5k, so combined total is 4,013,500 options.  But what's a liitle value off the top, especially when

[Cranium]

Is it believable that management had no idea how good Q1 was going to be on March 15? No that is not believable because they told anyone who wanted to listen to the conference call on March 8 that Q1 was going to be great.  In 2020 they issued the options on March 9, so I don't see any conspiracy in the timing of the options. Was this last options grant generous? Yes it was, but Dave

[shareholders1]

So it is sufficient to announce an expected blow out Q1 on March 8 via conference call comment? Does that constitute "general disclosure" ?  Is it also OK to issue 690k options on March 15, presumably at then market price, realizing of course that anyone else hoping to buy 690k shares would need to bid up the share price and pay much more? And the 420k options is generous (as

[Cranium]

Who could have know that drillers would be doing well with commodity prices soaring?  I was more shocked that TD didn't up their guidance after that call than I was with these earnings.  I was more surprised that the stock didn't go up in March than I was with these earnings. Did I say it's ok? It is what it is.  If the sector didn't have a great outlook and the

[shareholders1]

So an insider of a forest products company could buy shares 2 weeks before the Q end, knowing the current almost completed quarter's revenue numbers would be a blow out, and not be possibly considered to be trading on undisclosed material information -  "because everyone knows wood prices are up"? Does everyon know the specific affect on every forest products company revenue

[FrozenInOntario]

Hey shareholders1, So to summarize : you think that the option package provided to management is too generous.  And you deem the timing suspect.    They did issue 750 000 options last year on March 9 at 1.71.    So the timing and the number of options is similar. You think they are overpaid : maybe but do you have any comparisons with other companies ? And have you

[shareholders1]

Issuing options in mid March 2021 seems to be just taking value away from the public and handing it to Mgmt. That is not the idea behind options. If the public had info on revenues and contracts in mid March, the share price would have been bid up. The circumstances were not the same in March 2020. Option dilution - what does this range, corp to corp for entire option plan/ all emplyees? 1% per

[FrozenInOntario]

Hey, There is always a risk that management that holds a controlling interest in a company could make a move that would favor themselves and be unethical. If you think this is the case, move on to another driller. Not too sure that I follow your calculation about the CEO diluition and his 1.6% dilution versus 1.5%.   Heck, if he held no shares, dilution would be negative and this would

[shareholders1]

If annual options of 1.5%, for all particpants, is say the norm/ is acceptable, I am saying that if you factor in what the CEO already owns he alone effectively gets 1.6%. That is too much. Another way to look at it: If CEO owned 90% of the corp and the public 10%, and there was a 1% option plan, the public would get diluted 10% each year. Not sure what you mean by negative dilution. That would