What's new

auDA SGM 27 July 2018

Bacon Farmer

Top Contributor
And now the attendees are mingling and exchanging pleasantries whilst the scrutineers tally the votes.

Spoiler alert: As the resolutions have to be passed in each class (supply and demand) (under the constitution not the Corporations Act) there appears little to no chance of them being passed based on the proxies already disclosed.
 

ttfan

Top Contributor
If they've already seen the proxies, they probably would have resigned before the meeting if the vote went against them, to save the embarressment of being voted out.
 

JackBeNimble

Regular Member
If they've already seen the proxies, they probably would have resigned before the meeting if the vote went against them, to save the embarressment of being voted out.
Even if the Demand passes - it doesn't look like theres a chance of the Supply getting the votes required to pass the motion.
 

Bacon Farmer

Top Contributor
Provisional results (formal result (numbers) announced later tonight according to CL):
1 - Boardman - null
2 - CLeptos - defeated
3 - SHook - defeated
4 - SEwart - defeated

Proxy issues pending?

Constitution vs Corporations Act issue pending?
 

Bacon Farmer

Top Contributor
...CL does not know the auDA member verification protocol, refers Snoopy to website.

At the SGM, CLeptos, when asked admitted he did not know the verification protocols for membership and said Paul could find them on the auDA website.

Yet at the board meeting minutes 18 June 2018, "The Chair noted that he could not see any basis for Mr Connell discriminating against the proposed members, given that auDA's Constitutional requirements had been satisifed and that the members had passed auDA's verification protocols in accordance with auDA policy."

I ask how does he know they had passed the verification protocols if he doesn't know what they are? Oops that's embarrassing.

Surely Mr Chairman, when you are approving 955 new members whom are largely foreign employees of supply side members, you should know what the verification protocols are? Too much to ask? So Mr Connell was right to question this tsunami of foreign applicants.

166 applicants who had the same email address? C'mon really? How's the optics on that?

Any plans to verify them or would you like time to change the verification protocols so they can vote at the upcoming AGM?
 

snoopy

Top Contributor
In short,

  • They have *probably* lost the majority vote based on simple split (Corporations Act)
  • They have won the vote based splitting by class because of supply (constitution)

Have major doubts that the constitutional split would genuinely apply to this as it was a meeting called under the Corporations Act. They had a large vote against them in demand class.
 

snoopy

Top Contributor
btw: auDA claim to not know the final results or and absolutely refused to state what the result was on an overall split (Corporations Act). They announced they have "provisionally won".
 

Bacon Farmer

Top Contributor
auDA approves 955 members who are foreign employees of companies who will likely be the recipient of the $12 million "marketing initiative". 166 had the same email address. The Chair assures us they have passed verification protocols but he can't tell us what they are.

These employees will vote in line, you'd suspect, at the next AGM with their employers.

Is this simply cash for control?
 

Bacon Farmer

Top Contributor
btw: auDA claim to not know the final results or and absolutely refused to state what the result was on an overall split (Corporations Act). They announced they have "provisionally won".
Did I hear right that the board members had seen the proxies?
 

snoopy

Top Contributor
Did I hear right that the board members had seen the proxies?

They claim not to have seen them. I personally believe these votes should be collected by someone entirely independent from auDA as was used at the last AGM. The AEC has also been suggested in the past.
 

snoopy

Top Contributor
Probably the most bizarre part was when Angelo Giuffrida (Ventraip) gave a staged and ridiculous speech defending the "membership initiative". Mr Leptos had asked him to stand up and give his account at which point it was completely obvious to everyone that was all pre-planned.

Clearly Angelo had not been well briefed for Mr Leptos to have to prompt him in such unsubtle manner.
 

Community sponsors

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
10,979
Messages
91,777
Members
2,061
Latest member
domino111

Industry and community links

Top