Cheers BD, needless to say I meant tell me where I got things incorrect.
You haven't addressed the premise of my thread. I.e. that our board is loaded to prevent decisions that would in any way diminish Chinese control. Our CEO should most definitely be a director and should most definitely be acting in the best interest of our Australian company. I can't see the two Chinese directors currently on the board allowing this to happen. So how does this dilemma get solved. By not making the new CEO a director? I think the ramifications of having two Chinese board members are now surfacing as we search for a new CEO. He must be Australian and a director in my opinion otherwise when Peter Canterbury leaves the two Chinese directors will have total power. That can't be allowed to happen. It is bad enough as it is with the current stalemate situation of 2/2 Australian/Chinese interest. What a mess!
TON Price at posting:
5.8¢ Sentiment: None Disclosure: Held
