Bob has put forward some detail, including showing us his political leaning (viz a viz his remark about the outcome of the recent Qld election) however it seems to me that there are still some gaps to be filled in if holders are to make an informed decision as to who would best run the company so as to maximize shareholder wealth.
Claims about inertia regarding farm ins etc need to be fully explained. Mere absolute statements without detail are not good enough in my book. A mere statement to the effect that we have not been able to gain financial support should not be and and are not adequate. John Heugh has been cited as being an impediment. Why was he an impediment? Was he an impediment per se? Was the stand he took taken because some proposal/s were on the cards and he did not believe that it/they were in the interest of current holders? Or was Heugh reluctant to let go of something he had put years of work into even though it was irrational to do so? Much needs and remains to be explained.
Add to My Watchlist
What is My Watchlist?
