6 questions lodged at 2024 Metarock hybrid AGM
November 26, 2024
Below is the text of the 6 written questions submitted at the 50 minute Metarock hybrid AGM held in Brisbane on November 26 2024, plus a summary of the answers and some video grabs via Twitter. No early proxy disclosure and was only shareholder asking questions.
Q1. When disclosing the outcome of voting on all resolutions today including Andrew Watt's election, could you please advise the ASX how many of our 1565 shareholders voted for and against each item, similar to with a scheme of arrangement? This will provide a better gauge of retail shareholder sentiment and insight into the chronically low retail shareholder participation rate. Others like Qantas, ASX, Suncorp, Tabcorp & Computershare already do this. You've got the data, please let the sun shine in. How popular was Mr Watt?
Answer: The chair pointed to the 99% landslide caused by the controlling shareholder and then claimed the request wouldn't be possible today when Link would have the data readily to hand. Watch video of exchange via Twitter.
Q2. Have there been any material protest votes against any of today's resolutions, including this remuneration report item? If so, what concerns did shareholders raise with the company?
Answer: The question wrangler declined to read this in full and just pointed to strong proxy support on the rem report. There were big protests further down the agenda which should have been mentioned.
Q3. There have been many protest votes against resolutions seeking an extra 10% placement capacity this AGM season, so why are doing it? It is not good practice to allow a board to selectively place up to 25% of the company's shares to anyone they like over a 12 month period, diluting the existing shareholders without compensation for their lost property rights. You should never have requested it & I have voted against. If you need to raise capital, please do a renounceable pro-rata offer which treats all shareholders equally.
Answer: The chair sounded very much like a lawyer with a big lecture about the law and no real response to the question. Watch video of exchange via Twitter.
Q4. Was offering the Grant Thornton offices in Brisbane for this AGM part of the winning tender and did Pitcher Partners ever offer their premises for company events during their tenure as external auditor. What is the pricing for this event? Are shareholders being charged? Freebies like this from the auditor are not good practice so please ensure future AGM hosting is done on commercial terms.
Answer: The chair riffed for a bit before closing rejecting any suggestion of anything untoward. Pitcher Partners had never previously offered and no answer as to whether the Grant Thornton meeting room was a freebie. Watch video of exchange via Twitter.
Q5. Please ask at the end of the meeting: "Many thanks for running a good hybrid AGM via Link. You also did well by following the long agenda, when others in this situation would just offer one job lot opportunity for questions and debate. The only other requests I have for best AGM practice is to ensure a full archive of the AGM webcast is published on your website and that you move to earlier disclosure of the proxy position to the ASX along with the formal addresses next year. Any chance of a Yes on both of these?"
Answer: The chair appreciated the positive feedback but made no commitments. Watch video of exchange via Twitter.
Q6. What caused the 19% against vote against the resolution seeking approval for the major shareholder to provide financial support to the company?
Answer: the chair wouldn't say, which was a poor effort.
Copyright © 2024 The Mayne Report. All rights reserved
