Larry,
I won't comment on your "lunacy" ad hominem attack. As to the substance, what makes you think that Fr. Gregory wants to change current management so that we have a management willing to succumb to whatever J/L wants? I don't believe that is the case at all. I believe they are frustrated with the fact that management still has not properly addressed the alleged shortcomings of of the Johnson process, as well as numerous other issues. Many believe the Johnson process has very good potential. Others claim that it has produced nothing yet. To date, all I saw is one ambiguous press release on this issue. Moreover, management still has not addressed other major issues of concern, that have been listed by Brad Mertz and others. I suspect that the recent release was an attempt by management to show that it is making progress and hence no need for a shareholder meeting that will challenge them to give a proper accounting of all that has gone on with Naxos (and potentially lose their positions if they fail to show they have been acting reasonably and have a feasible blueprint for the future).
Anyhow, I'm amazed that someone like you, who supported the surrender of (I believe) 1/3 of Naxos, in favor of a new company that would primarily explore other properties, can claim with a straight face that they have a greater interest in the success of FL than someone like Fr. Gregory. People like Fr. Gregory have a firm belief in the richness of Naxos and have been invested in the company for years. They, as I, were aghast to hear that Naxos was going to be spinned off and we would end up surrendering a large percentage of the company (i.e., the FL property). I believe the current management was involved in those decisions and they have a lot of explaining to do regarding the sell-off that they almost pulled off.
sh |
