Since you have me on ignore, I'll have to try to r
Post# of 82688
(Total Views: 354)
Posted On: 05/05/2020 7:14:14 AM
Since you have me on ignore, I'll have to try to refute you publicly which I prefer not to do. While it's true that Mr Kay never said, "I promise", that's a narrow, legalese type argument. He's has made unambiguous statements about certain milestones he expected to achieve, which, I'm afraid did not work out.
So, yes, he never "promised" anything, but the making of clear statements about expectations by a CEO are usually taken as accurate signposts. Especially lacking caveats.
He did say, during the Appellate Court disaster that the other 4 cases were close to being resolved in our favor. And, recently, that there wouldn't be a r/s in the near future. I wonder how you took them, if not as "promises" then, how? There seems to be little wriggle room, in a non-legal sense.
When he told me at the shareholders' meeting cocktail hour, 5 years ago, that he expected to sell the company within a year, I didn't take it as a "promise", but I did take him at his word, or why would he say it?
So, yes, he never "promised" anything, but the making of clear statements about expectations by a CEO are usually taken as accurate signposts. Especially lacking caveats.
He did say, during the Appellate Court disaster that the other 4 cases were close to being resolved in our favor. And, recently, that there wouldn't be a r/s in the near future. I wonder how you took them, if not as "promises" then, how? There seems to be little wriggle room, in a non-legal sense.
When he told me at the shareholders' meeting cocktail hour, 5 years ago, that he expected to sell the company within a year, I didn't take it as a "promise", but I did take him at his word, or why would he say it?
(5)
(0)