(Total Views: 607)
Posted On: 01/25/2022 6:34:46 PM
Post# of 151768
Re: onestepahead #115991
There were plenty of shareholders who did not vote for 13D because we believed that they wanted to do things that were not in our best interests.
That isn't the same thing as "voting Nader back in." I withheld my votes and the total votes that we saw showed that there were plenty of other people who did the same thing.
I see this as a huge step forward -- putting in someone like Ms. Durbach to head this company, someone very familiar with corporate law, mergers, etc. -- as a huge positive step.
I wouldn't be surprised to see the classic cha-cha-cha tomorrow. Stock goes in one direction, then reverses dramatically and hugely, then goes back in the original direction.
My GUESS is that this will be viewed as a positive by those who are familiar with the company, but may be viewed as a negative by those who know nothing about it but do the knee-jerk "management change... bad" crowd.
Like I said, I am chagrined that I didn't buy today. Maybe I will be happy about it tomorrow, if they give me a chance to buy cheaper.
That isn't the same thing as "voting Nader back in." I withheld my votes and the total votes that we saw showed that there were plenty of other people who did the same thing.
I see this as a huge step forward -- putting in someone like Ms. Durbach to head this company, someone very familiar with corporate law, mergers, etc. -- as a huge positive step.
I wouldn't be surprised to see the classic cha-cha-cha tomorrow. Stock goes in one direction, then reverses dramatically and hugely, then goes back in the original direction.
My GUESS is that this will be viewed as a positive by those who are familiar with the company, but may be viewed as a negative by those who know nothing about it but do the knee-jerk "management change... bad" crowd.
Like I said, I am chagrined that I didn't buy today. Maybe I will be happy about it tomorrow, if they give me a chance to buy cheaper.
(4)
(0)Scroll down for more posts ▼
