Ann: New Leadership, Operational Priorities and Strategic Review, page-70

This stock went down due to one fatal buy. As a product in existence it was bad luck it exploded into the regulatory nightmare it is although a larger company may have done a regulatory due diligence more interrogatively. This would have all been fine if we had seen early goals met with remediation. A board that had any sense of shareholder obligations would know this was the number one critical issue. The longer the issues existed the more likely the badwill there would affect the company generally in getting other major partnerships etc. Instead the Board was useless, happy to make nothing comments and pulling in nice salaries. It took the ex CEO saying things were good in the last report followed by a quick revelation they were not to make that message of utter incompetence and dereliction of duty , loud and clear. If they could not fix the product they should have sold it off quickly limiting the carnage. Every major find manager and big Bank was singling EML praises when we bought in . Loudly. It had a great business case and the rest of the business would be turbo charging forward now if not for the ugly shadow of PFS. Top shareholders were piling in then and all this mess was not in the realm of possibility then. I did invest a small amount in a stock I did consider high risk which has turned out a nightmare and feel ridiculous buying but looking back this was a company that had everything going for it and was making leaps and bounds in growth . It ticked all the boxes at that time and that was merited. Buying was not an error. I would love to know in detail what the disputes within the Board were about when the regulatory issues came up given lots of changes there. Would be quite a story.