You continue to post nonsense. What are you dribbling about when you keep referring to the "compromise". I still don't understand what it is that you, who never spoke to Fred Arkoosh out of your own volition, claim Fred Arkoosh was seeking to work out with J/L (although your previous post claimed he conceived the original agreement with J/L). Certain persons on here were upset when Fred Arkoosh allegedly failed to seek any compromise with management at the last AGM; as to what type of compromise they wanted from him, you'll have to ask them. You may be frustrated with and not like the compromise recently reached. That is your problem. Personally, I think without it Naxos was doomed because of the substantial conflict between major concerned shareholders of this company. I consider the recent compromise a blessing and hope it succeeds.
Your cryptic comments about your views of Fred Arkoosh are amusing. I assume you are trying to convince others you are just posting unbiased businesslike views. However, IMO your personal dislike of Fred Arkoosh (and I would think he did not even know who you are let alone care what you thought of him) is manifested by your unsupported claim that he conceived the original arrangement with J/L, together with your negative comments about anything to do with him (previously, after proclaiming he deserved little, if any, credit for the ASE settlement, you went out of your way to suggest his sole motivation for spending all of that time in Canada was receipt of stock options for his time spent there).
As for myself, I am a Naxos shareholder, pure and simple. Keep your baseless suggestions that I have any other association with Naxos, or any association with J/L and Jimmy John to yourself. You are clever enough to carefully word your comments about the living. I suggest you continue doing so.
BTW, are you implying that M. Rodgers is still a Naxos insider? If so, what is your source for that assertion?
|
