Robin (and all),
I would like to echo some of your comments on the recent developments here, and add some of my own.
First, we must not relent. We still have the same board. Rhodes is down, but not out. I wonder just how as "a Director of the Company, he plans to remain actively involved in the arrangement of financial support for mid-sized companies." This sounds like rubbish. How can a company make such a statement? Either they are seeking funding or not. And just why is Rhodes arranging support for mid-sized companies? This implies that PRLN will invest in other companies?? With what as cash, I wonder? I am very confused. Perhaps there was a typo and it should have read "support from mid-sized companies." Then again, I have seen many, many inconsistencies in PRLN press releases and I am not will to accept "oops! a typo!" as another excuse. Press releases are extremely carefully considered and carefully worded documents.
Second, I know nothing about our new acting CEO and President. I have asked some contacts of mine with wide-ranging spheres of influence in biotechnology and I still have no info to share. This is not necessarily bad, but it would have been nice if I knew FOR SURE about this guy. Perhaps we can look up his scientific papers.
Condsidering the track record of the current Board, Robin, I'm afraid I am very skeptical and I would lean towards your scenario where either Tachovsky knows about the corruption at the Company (unless he is extraordinarily naive for someone with a Ph.D.) and is willing to be a pawn, or he just doesn't care, or is also corrupt. Again, all this is IMO. I'm sorry that the Board has given me reasons to seriously doubt them. In any case, what's the big deal about Tachovsky since he is only acting CEO? What exactly does that mean. It means they are still looking to find a new CEO. And guess who is sitting on the corporate sidelines waiting? Hint: his initials are KR.
Third, I am extremely wary of Nikolis as well. If for no other reason consider his statement on the press release "``The Board of Directors is extremely grateful for Keith's leadership in arranging funding of the Company in the past two years,'' said Mr. Theodore Nikolis, the Company's new Chairman." Several things about this sentence disturb me deeply, and many of our threaders have missed this. How does giving away company funds for screening of Indian herb that were never collected and tested, which I would interpret as stealing, how can this be something to be grateful for? Either :
(1) Nikolis is unfathomably stupid. He has been fooled by Rhodes. Five months, no not even five years, not even five decades will be enough time for the ever-unvigilent Nikolis to uncover the answer.
(2) Nikolis has found that Rhodes is not guilty, and he can prove it. If this is so, they why not answer our questions at the stockholder's meeting? Why not make a press release? If Nikolas doesn't realize that such a move would be very, very positive for the stock, then he falls into my #1 scenario of stupidity.
(3) Nikolis is absolutely, honest-to-God telling the truth. He is extremely grately for Keith's arranging funding for the company. This is because some of this funding is ending up going to people who don't even perform what they claim, oh, such as screening Indian herbs for example. And for some reason, Nikolas, is grateful for that. Now just why would Nikolis be grateful that Rhodes was handling PRLN cash in this manner? Can anyone give some ideas as to why Nikolis would profit from such an arrangement?
MOST IMPORTANTLY, look at with such an underhanded move the press release tells us that Nikolis is now the new Chairman of the Board. They put it at the end of the sentence which focuses your attention on Rhodes. They give absolutely no explanation of why he is fit for such a position, his credentials, etc... It appears that the real power resides with Nikolis. May he steer our little company well.
Finally, about our new VPs I am also wondering what functions they will serve. And why is Henderson not compensated. Gee, if only they had more people to work for free, they could really keep those expenses down.
Rick C. |
