Ariana Resources Share Discussion Threads

[bigglesbingham] 09/12/2021 10:08

Your suspicion you mean not "the" suspicion

[dixi] 09/12/2021 10:02

Oh no, now I've had my snout in the trough!!

[donald pond] 09/12/2021 09:52

And of course there is now the suspicion that with all the various investments AAU makes there may be more cheap options for the usual suspects at the investor company level. That would be very unethical.

[soulsauce] 09/12/2021 09:49

Well said Plasybryn.

[dixi] 09/12/2021 09:49

Oh go on then, it'd be rude niot to!!

[plasybryn] 09/12/2021 09:41

On a positive note I wonder how our cash position compares to our devastated Market Cap. As I said the other day and as we have said over many years the Board should be embarrassed by their lack of corporate mgmt. Yet they refuse to take any of the criticism on board and continue to pursue insensitive and poorly timed actions which destroy respect and confidence. Will shareholders make their feelings known or just walk. It is such a shame as so much is so good here.

[soulsauce] 09/12/2021 09:29

And we drop below 4p quell suprise!!

[donald pond] 09/12/2021 09:22

Good background There's a lesson there for all companies though; if you push through options in the face of opposition you create years of pain.

[plasybryn] 09/12/2021 09:14

I can confirm we certainly were unhappy at the time (2017) - (Options & Bonus) and we arranged a meeting with the Board at the Nomad's Office in London on behalf of shareholders. Nov31 took the lead role and I supported him.

[kaos3] 09/12/2021 09:01

my Q is - when, how much of and in what form that good work results will flow into my pocket? and start comparing

simple

Options are anglo american phenomena and not that much of use elsewhere (where corporate world is not touched by that culture - one works and gets paid for what he can prove he has done - enough) - and even some successful angloamerican investors like Buffett are strongly against

germans f.e. have supervisory board to keep the bod "in check" .....

[xow98] 09/12/2021 09:00

Shortarm,

I refer you to the old AAU board at the time re. feelings about the options being awarded

[donald pond] 09/12/2021 08:56

That sums it up Jaf and kaos To those who have been here for ages it's no big deal. To anyone more recent or who is looking to buy it's a big red flag

[bigglesbingham] 09/12/2021 08:55

Well my Stockholm syndrome as you put is has made me 300%. I would suggest I invest by looking at company fundamentals, accept directors are in the game to make money and don't get sidetracked by listening to moaning posters who get jealous when directors get rewarded by good performance. Actually I will correct that , I do listen to posters because if they say they are selling for stupid reasons then that makes for a great buying opportunity as it isn't related to a problem at the company . Goodbye.

[jaf1948] 09/12/2021 08:54

Again, it has nothing to do with the money or the options. It is simply sending a signal that the directors are paying more attention to themselves than trying to do something about lifting the share price for the other investors.

Whether that is true or not is unfortunately immaterial - it is the message that is being received by some (or many).

[dixi] 09/12/2021 08:50

I cannot see how this is reason to sell an investment, isn't that chucking the baby out with the bath water? I appreciate it's causing annoyance, but a reason to turn your back on all that AAU is actually doing on the ground? Just my opinion.

[bigglesbingham] 09/12/2021 08:49

If you look at remuneration package and the issuance of options at a price 20% higher than the price at the time (3 years ago) then you will realise their packages are significantly lower than peers. Bulk of MDV options have been added to his holding showing faith in the company. You say your experienced investor and several people have agreed with you so that makes you right but I suggest you do proper research on remuneration before slating options.

[dixi] 09/12/2021 08:46

If all ops come off successfully, it is inevitable that people will invest in AAU. This matter will just be a blip of noise along the way.

[donald pond] 09/12/2021 08:43

But biggles as Plas has pointed out NEDs should not be given options. So that breach of the code means many institutions will, as a matter of compliance, consider AAU uninvestable. You are making the mistake of valuing the company on what you think it's assets are worth and ignoring the fact that the board seem hellbent on destroying demand for the sharesYou've got Stockholm syndrome

[kaos3] 09/12/2021 08:40

clear distinction here in general - old guard investors that bought looong ago "cheap" and do not care about the share price that much, because they get a meaningful divi and see good operational management doing its job

vs

some of newcomers who see what donald pond is saying and compare present AAU situation with other investing options

result .... not many new investors coming here with a time span less than few years ... specially as the divi elsewhere (in rio or poly etc) can be compared f.e. (not much share price appreciation there or here in the short term)

"nobody loves me" Q answered lol

all imho

[bigglesbingham] 09/12/2021 08:36

Good riddance if you don't understand the concept of options and business. These were issued years ago when the price was lower than 1.55p and an incentive to get the share price up. He didn't sell these 2m he spent £31k adding to his holding and showing faith in the company.

[tyranosaurus] 09/12/2021 08:32

The investors can get stuffed.
Directors only interested in lining their own pockets.
I will be selling.

[plasybryn] 09/12/2021 08:29

Should non-executive directors own shares?
Both the UK Corporate Governance Code 2012 (UK Code) and the Australian ASX Corporate Governance Principles and Recommendations 2014, explicitly discourage the grant of share options or performance-based remuneration to NEDs.
The reason is that such grants or remuneration may lead to bias in the NEDs’ decision-making and compromise objectivity.
SID’s Statement of Good Practice similarly cautions that including NEDs in share option plans, performance share plans, or other equity- related arrangements should only be done after a full consideration of the attendant risks of compromising directors’ independence or judgment.
The UK Code goes a step further. If options are granted, shareholders’ approval should be sought in advance, and any shares acquired by exercise of the options should be held until at least one year after the NED leaves the board.
BACK TO BASICS
Perhaps the distinction between not approving share options and equity-based remuneration for NEDs versus acceptability of share ownership is best understood with a closer examination of the role of these company officers.
Management is given share-based remuneration to incentivise them to drive the company’s performance. In contrast, NEDs, particularly independent directors, play an oversight role. They are there to provide a check and balance on management. It could be argued that they should not be similarly incentivised with share- based remuneration. To do so would put NEDs at the same rank as executives who should be supervised and remunerated by NEDs.

[donald pond] 09/12/2021 08:29

No, I did invest a few years ago and have been supportive, but this doesn't look good. The fact that I am getting thumbs up from people reading this board shows it doesn't look good to a significant proportion of those who likely already think well of AAU. Most experienced investors will go to the RNS history and see a string of announcements about directors being awarded shares, and selling shares, and being given more, and exercising options, and think, that's not really the sort of company that merits further investigation. Them's the facts.

[shortarm] 09/12/2021 08:24

Lifestyle company my muscular buttocks!!
The options were granted above the shareprice years ago - no one complained then?
Good to know you’ve uninvested yourself - maybe there’ll be a mite less whining on here :-D