- The preceding was contained in a statement issued by Edgar Oche, Consulting Communications Specialist, and made available to reporters at the weekend.
- They voted to support the resolution on directors’ remuneration, meaning they were happy with how the CEO and directors ran the company. The majority voted for every solution.
The preceding was contained in a statement issued by Edgar Oche, Consulting Communications Specialist, and made available to reporters at the weekend. Edgar, in the report, said once the final dividend is paid, along with the 20 per cent higher dividend of 3 cents per share announced for the first quarter of this year, Seplat’s $537 million returns to shareholders in the form of dividends since the Initial Public Offering (IPO) in 2014, will have surpassed the $535 million it raised from shareholders.
The statement further stated, “To return to shareholders more than you raised in the IPO is an impressive feat, one that takes good management and a strong focus on profitability and the generation of cash. It takes a talented workforce committed to following the company’s leadership in pursuing success that enables such generous returns. This milestone is evidence of a well-managed company with happy and hard-working staff. The profitability and dividend payments are facts that speak for themselves.
Three lawsuits, brought by 13 shareholders owning less than 800 shares between them, claim, against the evidence, that all is not well, that the company is poorly managed and rife with racism that would surely sour its performance.
In the latest case, they even tried to stop the Annual General Meeting (AGM), a regulatory obligation for companies. But how can they claim this despite these self-evident achievements and the strong start to 2023 recorded in its recent first-quarter results? “Shareholders are having none of it. At last week’s AGM, they voted to receive the company’s accounts, meaning they did not see any problems with them. They voted to support the resolution on directors’ remuneration, meaning they were happy with how the CEO and directors ran the company. The majority voted for every resolution.”
“They did not object or raise concerns about allegations brought by the 13 shareholders; quite the opposite, they were frustrated with the attacks of the few. They can see clearly that this is a coordinated scheme, a conspiracy to deceive the courts and shareholders that this successful, profitable company is somehow underperforming.”