| From: waznot | 11/23/2021 12:52:04 AM | | | | | | Mark, sorry to hear of the spying on your third-party app. You are right to take actions as you have stated.
I think you are correct as to the person that could be spying on you as:
1) Posts from GermanyBoy:
2) Post 837 – “founder of an IT and digital research company in Canada”;
3) Post 934 – “close to Andrew Long, I will reveal his true identity”;
4) Post 948 – “ I love investigation “;
5) Post 954 – “Five years ago, my Development Manager”
Of course, first read of the above is that it is B. S. On second read it is still B.S. but now he is bragging. Above is an indication of a connection between GBoy and the ‘spy’. |
| | Minera IRL | Stock Discussion ForumsShare | RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read |
|
| To: idamexusa who wrote (1004) | 11/23/2021 9:41:52 AM | | From: JGCGI | | | | | As a concerned shareholder do I just vote against all 5 items? Will someone be keeping track of our votes? If so, how do we report our share count and votes? Sorry to put the burden on someone else. I do appreciate everyone's work in trying to do the right thing here. |
| | Minera IRL | Stock Discussion ForumsShare | RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1) |
|
| From: DaveAu | 11/23/2021 10:18:21 AM | | | | | | | Is anyone attending? I don't like to appoint "Gerardo Pervez, Diego Benavides" as my proxy but unless I have another name, that's my only choice (using ProxyVote.com). |
| | Minera IRL | Stock Discussion ForumsShare | RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1) |
|
| To: JGCGI who wrote (1005) | 11/23/2021 10:20:39 AM | | From: andrewlong | | | | Can I suggest we all hold off from submission of our votes, we have a few weeks.
Initially, I was going 'against' all items, still may do so, but with the new proposed director of Martin Mount, maybe I will vote for him. I do not know enough about Mr. Mount as yet.
Your suggestion of 'keeping track' is interesting. As far as I understand Mark received and created a list of CS and the amount of shares for each ( to get to that approx 30 million).
First, if anyone else has idea, please share.
Second, I think Mark will respond with ideas (he is dealing with some serious stuff now), we will eventually read his thoughts.
Original strategy was to vote out Benavides, still is.
Our actions going forward:
1) vote against everything, or
2) vote against all except 'yes' for Mount
we have the time before final voting
andrewlong |
| | Minera IRL | Stock Discussion ForumsShare | RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read |
|
| From: mark_ikn | 11/23/2021 11:25:23 PM | | | | | | How are shareholders supposed to make an informed decision on the AGM without knowing the results of the internal inquiry? The directors said they were investigating and that the company uses SAP, the results of financial movements would normally have been known to them within days (at worst)). Instead, September, October and most of November have passed and we still don't know anything, not even a brief summary of their findings. In order to vote correctly, we should have information on this issue.
After all, they want us to re-appoint the person under investigation and now voting has already opened. There's a clear fiduciary duty to complete here, how are we supposed to vote if we are left without key information? |
| | Minera IRL | Stock Discussion ForumsShare | RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (2) |
|
| To: mark_ikn who wrote (1010) | 11/24/2021 12:14:23 AM | | From: Kiwi Pom | | | | Exactly
In my complaint to RTZ I will be insisting not how they vote in the MIRL AGM, but that they do vote and do not take the route of abstention.
If they are really serious about their ESG obligiations, particularly the G, there is no way they can not take a position on the conduct of this board of directors.
I for one will ensure a fuss is raised if they do not vote - how they cast their vote is up to their business ethics. |
| | Minera IRL | Stock Discussion ForumsShare | RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read |
|
| To: mark_ikn who wrote (1010) | 11/24/2021 12:23:22 AM | | From: andrewlong | | | | Well, here we go again, the Board of Directors are not doing their job.
I would of thought that the Board/Company would have postponed the Annual Meeting until their investigation was completed. As a shareholder I may have not liked that decision but ………
I think the Board wants the shareholders to vote against the re election of Benavides and Hema. And then let the new board clean up the mess by dismissing the CEO.
OR Does the current Board feel or even think they have enough votes to keep the status quo. Besides the CS share holdings and I am sure many other dissatisfied holders will vote Benavides off as Director.
I hate to suggest that we all write/emails to MIRL hot line, to OSC, to Rio Tinto, etc
In the case Rio Tinto, if the meeting goes ahead as is, they may never see a return on their 44 million shares. And that would be applicable to us as well.
Any thoughts from you as to how we can put pressure on the Board?
andrewlong
P.S. I just saw the wise post by Kiwi Pom. |
| | Minera IRL | Stock Discussion ForumsShare | RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read |
|
| |
