That's fine Arf ... they are just YOUR conclusions then that you have formed from the data (factual or otherwise ... data can have errors).
I wouldn't go as far as saying your conclusions on KP have infuriated me ... they do however "enlighten" me (take that whatever way you want). No shortage of those conclusions here in HC.
Like I said "agenda" - nothing sinister - you have your agenda too, same with Split and all the others voices. I don't particularly care whether you are all aligned/unanimous or not. Don't care if your anonymous or choose to put yourself in the public area (which you surely will do with EGM 249D and Class Actions). If that's what you think necessary then go for it - no one can "stop" you ... everyone will have an opportunity to vote on the outcome.
IMO, what you are failing to understand is the issue of "Shareholder agency" - which has been around from day dot.
But regarding sequence of events ... IMO JB is right ... it is the BoD that hires and fires a CEO and in that capacity the main person is the Chair.
So #1 Priority is to get the new Chair in the seat as soon as practically possible.
Then #2 Priority is then get a new CEO (and if he is appointed to the Board then he is an Executive Director and not "independent").
Add to My Watchlist
What is My Watchlist?
