Hi, Darkgreen,
I'll try to get back to your question about why I still have confidence sometime later, but allow me one moment of musing now.
I keep thinking about Lev and the Board of Directors sans Lev. The board is comprised of Carl Berg, the prominent venture capitalist, Alan Shugart of disk drive fame, and now Bert Roberts, the Chairman of MCI. Each of these men is accomplished, each is presumably shrewd, each is presumably unwilling to be embarrassed, and surely each is loath to being sued as a director for failing to carry out his fiduciary responsibilities. (I expect, too, each is reluctant to lose his Valence investment, regardless of how small a fraction of his total wealth).
The question I keep asking myself is why they allow Lev to operate as he does. Is Lev such a compelling figure that he can bamboozle them into going along with anything he wants? If not, then why do they stick with his present operating methods? They have no doubt seen everything we have seen, and probably much more. Yet Berg and Shugart have stuck with him (and/or Valence) through thick and thin, and now even Roberts has climbed on board. Moreover, all of them have increased their investments in the company in recent months. As I say, I keep musing about the significance of their ongoing support of Lev.
To seek the beginnings of an answer to this question, I have decided to attend the annual meeting despite the reservations in my recent reverie. I want to see these people in person, and I want to see how they interact among themselves and with the shareholders. I want to get some idea of why they seem to have so much confidence in Lev when so much is at stake.
Regards, lws |
