Just to post my opinion on the vote, I voted for across the board. For those that want to not vote in Nader or Jorden and not for the compensation package there is some thought that I put behind this.
Way back 7-8 years ago, Jorden and Nader jumped into this. The company at that point was broke and had nothing to move forward with. There was no payroll, no trials etc.. If we average out the years since then to now as far as compensation goes, it is not as difficult to digest the current payroll. Also, the compensation package that was boosted beyond what most would think is reasonable was more about protecting the company. By giving shares to the board and employees they were ensuring that they always had the ability to vote in measures that were necessary and defend against activist investors looking to take over the company. 13D's first action was to overturn this compensation so they could get in. The legal costs and negative pressure on the SP could have been avoided. These compensation plans are more about defending the company, it is difficult to accept these actions as necessary but they are. We all now know how these outsiders weasel into things with very little transparency as to their actual intentions.
Also, as much as it feels good to send a message to Nader by not voting for his re-election, you really have to evaluate what this process is. To me there are 3 forces in getting a product to revenue. the first is the product (which is as perfect as anyone can ask for) second is the team running things (which should have an easy job because the product is perfect) and third is the actual process to go through. This third part is the part that I feel many are ignoring. It is not easy for big Pharma to get a drug through trials, why would anyone think that it should be easy for cytodyn? it is so complicated and costly that failure and delays are to be expected no matter how skilled the management team is. It is easy to cherry pick the times Nader said this timeline and he failed, it must be included that there is a 5% change that timeline could happen no matter what is done. We are responsible to understand that and know the CEO has to paint a rosy picture given the difficulty of the process.
Way back 7-8 years ago, Jorden and Nader jumped into this. The company at that point was broke and had nothing to move forward with. There was no payroll, no trials etc.. If we average out the years since then to now as far as compensation goes, it is not as difficult to digest the current payroll. Also, the compensation package that was boosted beyond what most would think is reasonable was more about protecting the company. By giving shares to the board and employees they were ensuring that they always had the ability to vote in measures that were necessary and defend against activist investors looking to take over the company. 13D's first action was to overturn this compensation so they could get in. The legal costs and negative pressure on the SP could have been avoided. These compensation plans are more about defending the company, it is difficult to accept these actions as necessary but they are. We all now know how these outsiders weasel into things with very little transparency as to their actual intentions.
Also, as much as it feels good to send a message to Nader by not voting for his re-election, you really have to evaluate what this process is. To me there are 3 forces in getting a product to revenue. the first is the product (which is as perfect as anyone can ask for) second is the team running things (which should have an easy job because the product is perfect) and third is the actual process to go through. This third part is the part that I feel many are ignoring. It is not easy for big Pharma to get a drug through trials, why would anyone think that it should be easy for cytodyn? it is so complicated and costly that failure and delays are to be expected no matter how skilled the management team is. It is easy to cherry pick the times Nader said this timeline and he failed, it must be included that there is a 5% change that timeline could happen no matter what is done. We are responsible to understand that and know the CEO has to paint a rosy picture given the difficulty of the process.
17
2
