"I didn't know that Doug's wife was on the board. I never made it a point to investigate who was on the board. I found out the same time you guys did, when the 10K was released. I agree with you that the board needs independent representation, and that Doug's wife poses a potential conflict of interest."
"Potential has no place in that phrase. It is a conflict of interest. Period."
Above quotations are from Gator and ithasnospaces, respectively.
I hate to inject reality here, but having a relative [wife/parent/child/sibling] on the Board of Directors is neither illegal, immoral, unethical, nor inherently a conflict of interest. In fact, for smaller family businesses that have gone public, it is the norm. This is exactly what ETPI is - a small family business that went public.
United Technologies, a Dow Jones Industrial 30 company, was at one point run by Bill Agee (husband) and Mary Cunningham (wife). It happens! REAL life!
Look at your Annual Reports for NASD National Market companies. Financial service companies, retail stores, software companies, internet IPOs. Many of these have two or more directors with the same surname. If Motley Fool goes public, should Dave and Tom Gardner be prohibited from serving on their board together? These are the people who FOUNDED their companies. What about Ford Motor Company? How many generations of Fords served on that Board? How many DECADES went by before a Ford family member was NOT Chairman of the Ford Board?
And who founded ETPI? It was Doug Butcher AND his wife. This is NOT a conflict of interest. This is how the company began. Let's move beyond this phantom issue, folks!
MY Disclaimer: I am defending the principle of having family members serving together on a Board of Directors where it is appropriate. I am NOT defending the management or Board of ETPI.
|
