Hi Mark, there are obviously two points of view here:
A) Firamada has eliminated the corrupt element, Monas, and his replacement should be allowed time to correct past mistakes and proceed with a clean slate.
B) Firamada's corrupt element, Adam, remains in the drivers seat and should continue to be held accountable for past deceptions irregardless of future results.
There is no doubt that in the past, there was false information released by Firamada. I can appreciate the optimism many here have with the change in one member of management and the addition of another.
My impression is that Adam is not an aggressive CEO. He hires a president, like Monas, who has what he lacks, an aggressive, persuasive leader with a financial background. Monas could fill two roles with his financial background.
Adam probably gave Monas too much control, and the results are history. I don't want to believe Adam was the one deceiving investors. I do believe Adam is not a strong enough leader to lead this company. His actions were either one of deceit or one of weakness.
Holding this company accountable and demanding answers is not whining. It is a shareholders responsibility. Is being blind to the past wise? The difference I see now is that we get put off passively rather than aggressively. Many believed in Monas, now not as many believe in Malinoff (maybe a good sign). The management style has changed.
Who are really the wise ones here? The ones who are willing to ignore the past, or the ones who remind us of the past? Maybe both! Doesn't true DD come from past results? I hear positives rehashed here and all over SI.
The fact is, things can get worse, and the price of the stock can continue to drop. Past history supports this trend. We can't change the future either. Neither hope nor confidence can assure a better future.
Time will tell the outcome, but by then it will only be in the past. Darn! Got to get me a crystal ball that works.
Nutty Buddy |
