To: Kurt R. who wrote (13730 ) 6/19/1998 11:54:00 AM From: Neal davidson Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 20681
This thread is deteriorating, and it is not a pleasant sight. Fine, Kurt, you are not whining . We can call it something else if you prefer, but the fact of the matter is that you are saying the same thing over and over and over and over. We all wish Jimmy had done some things differently. He owns lots of shares and had enough incentive to make the stock go up without lowering the strike price of his options. But his actions were not illegal and not all that uncommon. We now have new management, and while JJ is still on the board, he is not running the day-to day-operations, and his presence, from what I can see, has not hurt the company. I doubt that CPM would have agreed to sign on with Naxos if they felt that present or former management was still a problem. A general question was posed to you and the other recent ranters: What has current management done which is unethical? No answers to that question have been given, except the vague assertion that all former purported ethical violations should be recanted by present management. I am quite certain that present management does not approve of unethical behavior. That is why management has changed. Kurt: what is your agenda? Instead of complaining again and again, tell us what you want done in the future (besides management agreeing to your ethics proposals, as fiduciary duties are inherent and do not require your ideas). The past is gone, and it is of no help for you to keep rehashing it, raising inferences of nefarious behavior by current management. Do you have substantive proposals? And Kurt, please do not accuse me of being engaged in "thread discipline." You know that is not the case, as I have been a vocal critic in the past, and, as you should remember, I am the one who originally said that Mark Silvers has pom-poms. Nonetheless, as I have told you in private messages, I am satisfied with current management and where they are taking us. Chewy, why don't you stop asking rhetorical questions which are clearly intended to raise sinister inferences. When did you stop beating your wife? Hmmm...tough question isn't it? Because no matter what you answer, the inference is raised that you did, at one time, beat your wife. Your questions are the same...always implying that management has done something wrong, without any proof whatsoever. It is not illegal to have an offshore account. If this stock goes up to $100.00, you will wish you had the stock in an offshore account in order to avoid taxes. I know very reputable Wall Street investors who have stocks held in off-shore accounts. (P.S. Chewy, since you so often fail to understand people's points, let me clarify that I was not intending to assert that you ever beat your wife. I was trying to make a point. I am truly sorry that I feel like I have to explain that to you.) JLA: You are a bright, articulate man, and I hope you will return to the thread sooner than you have indicated. When you do return, let's hear some fresh ideas, not rehash. If you tried to call Sid Kemp again, I would like to hear about your conversation. Please email me or send me a private message if you will not post on here.