Below is what I call a fair and unbiased post.........
TC conveyed to me a number of times that he wasn't happy in the way NG did certain things.
Typical weak chairman, complains to shareholders but does nothing. He also complained about MT many times to us.
NG had/has an extremely difficult job. If the Chairman isn't performing, the MD is failing to secure deals and shareholders had lost confidence how on earth do you attract investors to keep the company going.
While NG may be far from perfect, and in the absence of a good/strong MD & Chairman NG has done surprisingly well in keeping the company afloat at times when they were more than really doing it tough and looking down the barrel of receivership with very little hope or options. There are very few shareholders that truly understood their delicate financial situation.
I am not referring to options like Bergen deal which I believe is a TC job but in the many years prior.
There were at least 4 years (prior to Bergen (between 2010 and 2016_) where the company would have become insolvent if it wasn't for the intervention by NG at his own personal cost.
Many CFO's would have stood by and watched the company go down with the Chairman and MD to be held responsible.
In those years NG went way beyond his duties to save the company at his own personal expense and did so.
Irrespective as to whether people like him, dont like, want to keep him, want him gone, like it or not we do have him to thank for those steps otherwise APG would be non existent today.
Sure, give me some flack over this but it is what it is.
