If your argument is that maybe we can do better than NP, SK, and the rest of the board I’ll always listen to that argument because that’s how everyone should look at their company or their investment.

If you’re in the corporate world long enough you’ll hear the word “kaizen” thrown around a bunch. Kaizen is a Japanese business term that basically means “continuous improvement” and why wouldn’t we all strive for being better in our lives, investments, or the companies we own?

Replacing the board or NP with better options would be an example of kaizen, at least generally speaking. But where you lose me (and probably everyone else) is when you equate your desire to improve the board with some level of likelihood that these 13d(bags) are capable of that. Just because they’re an option doesn’t mean they’re a good option. .

Let me try to use a different example to make my point.

You own a company that develops and sells software to hospitals. Your software team has been dropping the ball and the last two releases have been buggy and customers are upset. You put out a job posting to replace a couple people and only get one response. He went to Stanford and has a few lofty initials after his name. He seems overqualified on paper. He was also fired for writing malware into the software at his old company. He lied about it on record multiple times. He was fired for cause and badmouthed the company to all of your peers. Knowing what you know, do you hire him to replace an underperforming team member just because you want to improve the team? Or do you take a hard pass and look for other ways to source talent?

They are, without question, a worse option than what we have now.