Long-suffering shareholders at James Crean vented their anger and frustration at the company's poor performance but were powerless to effect changes as the institutional investors once again backed its management team.

The more than 40 shareholders who attended its a.g.m. in Dublin yesterday were in no mood for excuses from chairman and chief executive Mr Ray McLoughlin, who was told in no uncertain terms that his continuing stewardship was impeding its progress.

The company, which de-merged its print and packaging division to OakHill Group last year, is now totally reliant on its struggling US frozen meals and canned poultry operations. One shareholder told Mr McLoughlin that while James Crean was last year viewed by the stock markets as a "dog", the demerger plan has left shareholders with "two pups".

Mr McLoughlin blamed the decline in profits and the subsequent decision by the board not to pay a dividend to shareholders this year on cyclical factors. He stressed that the underlying fabric of the business remains sound and the outlook is solid. He added that the shares' poor performance was caused largely by the lack of appetite among institutional investors for small stocks, saying the board of James Crean was as powerless as those in Bank of Ireland or AIB to buck the market.

Shareholders were incensed at the chairman and chief executive's efforts to compare James Crean's performance with that of the two main banks. Mr John O'Hanrahan said the company was one of the Dublin market's worst performers.

The failure of its US director, Mr Matt Kwasek, once again to attend the a.g.m. was a bone of contention. And tempers flared when it was revealed that despite the sluggish performance of this division, James Crean paid Mr Kwasek a £418,000 (€530,750) bonus last year.

But it was Mr McLoughlin's continuing role as both chairman and chief executive which triggered most anger. After last year's a.g.m., Mr McLoughlin told shareholders he would be stepping down and would be joining them at this year's meeting. "You're still there," one shareholder reminded him.

The militant few all voted against Mr McLoughlin's re-election but their handful of votes failed to make a difference when the investment institutions had already cast 13 million in favour.