6 questions lodged at 2025 Pilbara Metals hybrid AGM

Q1. The latest ASIC report summarising net short positions across the ASX300 shows that 12% of our total shares on issue or around 400 million are currently sold short, which makes us one of the 5 most heavily shorted stocks in the ASX100. However, the short position was closer to 20% a few weeks ago. At the same time, our largest shareholder Australian Super lifted its stake from 11.54% on August 13, according to the annual report, to 17.54% by September 10. The stock has doubled since the annual report came out and this is the largest percentage stake Australia's biggest super fund has in any ASX100 company. What is going on, is any of this connected and do you know if Australian Super has a policy of making any of its $2.2 billion stake in our company available to short sellers?

Answer: The question wrangler needlessly edited this down and chair Kathleen Conlon reckons 17.5% shareholder Australian Super does not lend its $2 billion stake to short sellers. So, how is the stock currently 12% sold short? Index funds, presumably! Watch video of exchange via Twitter.

Q2. The 2024-25 annual report says we have 122,312 shareholders, which makes us one of the 20 most popular stocks on the ASX with retail shareholders. However, one of the problems with retail shareholders is less than 2% of us bother to vote at AGMs these days, which explains why the turnout at last year's AGM was only 52.35% or 1.58 billion of our 3.015 billion shares, which were voted for or against the new chair Kathleen Conlon's election. With 47.6% of the company's total capital sitting on the electoral sidelines, this elevates Australian Super's 17.54% stake close to a control position exceeding 30% when it comes to contested resolutions put to the vote. Who do we deal with at Australian Super and what would we say to them if they requested a board seat?

Answer: The question wrangler needlessly edited this down and chair Kathleen Conlon said Pilbara Minerals spends a lot of time with Australian Super personnel but chair Kathleen Conlon won't say what she would say if their biggest 17.5% shareholder asked for a board seat. The correct answer is simply that they've never asked for a board seat and would consider such a request if it came in. Watch video of exchange via Twitter.

Q3. It was disappointing that you rejected a request to disclose the proxy votes earlier to the ASX along with the formal addresses, something many companies now do, including Perth-based Monadelphous as early as this morning. Such timely disclosure facilitates a more informed AGM discussion. Did any of the proxy advisers recommend against this remuneration report item, or any other item of business today, and did this translate into any material against votes? Can the chair please share with all shareholders the back and forth engagement that occurred with proxy advisers and major institutional investors before today's AGM?

Answer: The question wrangler needlessly edited this down and puzzled why chair Kathleen Conlon twice referred to proxy advisers as “proxy holders”? Annoyingly, she hid behind “confidentiality” in laying out who recommended against, only observing that there was “some negativity” on multiple remuneration items which materialised into 9-16% protest votes. Watch video of exchange via Twitter.

Q4. There was a 9.7% protest vote on the proxies against Nicholas Cernotta's re-election. What was the issue? Did a proxy adviser recommend against and does the chair believe the rationale for such a recommendation was understandable in any way, or did she regard it as non-sensical? Also, having first joined the board in February 2017, could Nicholas confirm that this will be his last 3 year term term and he won't be seeking a 4th term in November 2028 when he will have served for almost 12 years?

Answer: The question wrangler needlessly edited this down and chair Kathleen Conlon should have named the proxy adviser which recommended against the rem resolutions and her rem chair. No firm response that this would be his last term, just general governance guff about managing board succession. Watch video of exchange via Twitter.

Q5. Well done for holding onto the company's ASX code of PLS with this name change to PLS Group. Were you influenced by others doing this recently, most notably Breville Group which is now called BRG Group and Seven Group Holdings which is now called SGH Group. BHP also did this back in the day. However, I'm puzzled why you didn't include the words Metals, Minerals or Lithium in the name. When it came to the management recommendation and board vote, which naming option came second and what was wrong with that option?

Answer: The question wrangler needlessly edited this down but missed most of chair Kathleen Conlon's response due to the connection briefly dropping out. Watch video of exchange via Twitter.

Q6. As one of the most popular retail stocks on the ASX, why don't you launch a standalone $30,000 share purchase plan at a 5% discount to VWAP just to send a message to the investment banking community that retail shareholders are a loyal and reliable source of capital which will support companies without demanding huge discounts as too often occurs with institutional placements. SPPs also don't come with the baggage of ticket clipping brokers taking fees of between 1.5% and 6% on most placements. If the SPP is strongly supported and you raise more than is required, those funds could be used to launch an on-market buyback to further imperil the short sellers who have done their shirts when the stock doubled over the past 4 months and might close out their positions if faced with the twin assaults of swarm retail support and a company buyback.

Answer: Not asked. Watch video of chair Kathleen Conlon closing the meeting prematurely via Twitter.

Copyright © 2025 The Mayne Report. All rights reserved

• share
  Share
  • 
    Facebook
  • 
    Twitter
  • email
    Email
  • print
    Print
  • link
    Copy Link
  • cancel
    Cancel