3 questions lodged at 2026 Mirrabooka (MIR) hybrid AGM
October 5, 2026
Below is the text of the 3 written questions submitted at the 80 minute Mirrabooka (MIR) 1.30pm hybrid AGM via MUFG platform and at The Westin in Melbourne on October 5, 2026. See notice of meeting detailing just 2 resolutions. Market cap was $515m on AGM day. The proxies were not disclosed early in the formal addresses. There were no protest votes. Also, see 4 questions asked at lively 2025 AGM.
Q1. Earlier today, we heard that less than 10% of our group's staff have a history with Goldman Sachs or JB Were, our 2 sponsoring organisations. In terms of putting together strong teams of investment professionals, have we ever lost any staff to Geoff Wilson's WAM group or recruited staff from the WAM stable of LICs? WAM is the most aggressive player in LIC land, regularly launching hostile takeovers of smaller LICs. Why haven't we ever done the same to them, especially given they leak huge fees to its external manager and are currently trading at a big discount to NTA?
Answer: CEO Alison Gibson said they just need to focus on their own business. They're clearly way too conservative for something as adventurous as saving WAM's 150,000 retail shareholders from Geoff's excessive fees. Watch video of exchange via Twitter.
Q2. As this is the final of the 4 AFIC stable LICs, I'd just like to say thank you for running best practice hybrid AGMs, spaced across 2 days so that there is no pressure on shareholders to wrap up their questions. This is in stark contrast to the WAM stable which is running 9 public company LIC AGMs on the same day next month. However, at least WAM LICs disclose how many shareholders voted for and against in the poll results, something I've been asking the AFIC stable to do for years. How many shareholders lodged proxy votes ahead of today's meeting and why won't you disclose how they voted in the poll results?
Answer: Company secretary Matthew Rowe effectively said “We follow the law and do nothing more”, which is hardly transparent or shareholder friendly. However, at least he revealed the proxy turn out was above 250. Apologies for low volume on this recording. Watch video of exchange via Twitter.
Q3. Has anyone ever done a study at the AFIC stable to assess whether we are more likely to invest in a company if one of their directors or a former CEO happens to sit on one of our boards? Is there a positive correlation. Also, do we have a bias in favour of Melbourne and Sydney-based companies. We've always been under-weight Perth-based companies, especially miners. How often do our investment team travel to Perth and visit companies and how often do we visit a company which we've never owned? Are they even prepared to meet with us?
Answer: The chair Greg Richards said they'd never looked at the correlation and manage conflicts appropriately. This wasn't a question about conflicts and there's nothing wrong with over-lapping investments. Turns out they have lots of meetings in Perth with companies they've never invested in. Doubt they've had a Perth-based director either. Watch video of exchange via Twitter.
Copyright © 2026 The Mayne Report. All rights reserved
