Having reviewed your recent posts, allow me to summarize.
1. You don’t believe Joel is up for the job of CEO.
2. You believe anyone with a different view to you is a “kool aid drinker” or a person who operates from a “blinded bias” or “is not coming from a rational mindset”. Those are your words.
Firstly, if you believe that any of my posts fit the above narrative then it’s incumbent on you to point this out in detail and debate the facts. I’m open to criticism, but you have to stick around and engage in a dialogue. The current “drive by” attempted assassination of IHL indicates your motives are impure.
Here’s some thoughts for you to consider.
I completely disagree with your assessment of Joel. Respectfully, until you’ve had a significant position in a company then you may not have faced the importance of critically analyzing the board and CEO on every level. And there are a lot of people on this thread who have backed IHL with serious money, including shareholders with smaller positions but large in context to their wealth.
Do you even hold shares in IHL? I doubt it.
Every significant shareholder I speak to has made the effort to build a relationship with the board because they understand how important it is to have a view on management behavior. These are people in the top 10 and HC isn’t their source of information or confidence.
Respectfully, as an investor who is highly critical of Joel, have you actually met him? That’s a serious question and unless you confirm that you have met Joel then I’ll assume otherwise. In fact, I’d wager you’ve never even spoken to him or any other Director on the board.
If you’ve never met Joel then please don’t lecture me and other shareholders about his capabilities. I’m not going to defend Joel without conducting my own DD and as a consequence of the 100’s of hours I’ve invested I now have every confidence in his capabilities as CEO.
Frankly, I think you’d be far less enthusiastic about your criticism of Joel if you were sitting across the table from him, which I’d be happy to arrange for you. It’s easy being rude and disrespectful when you’re anonymous.
Secondly, it’s the board that appoints the CEO. Is it your opinion that Peter Widdows, Troy Valentine and Bob Clark are morons?
Are you suggesting that you hold a special ability to assess Joel’s abilities and determine what IHL requires to lead this company, but you’ve never actually spoken to him. That’s laughable.
Which brings me to point number three.
Have you met Peter? You’ve spoken highly of him but I’m guessing you’ve never met him either. I have many times and I can assure you that he doesn’t suffer fools and has no issue making hard decisions. If Joel wasn’t up to the job as CEO he categorically would not be in the job. Peter is tough and cutthroat.
So if you trust Peter’s judgement then it’s absolutely reasonable to suggest that you would support his assessment of Joel as CEO. You can’t have it both ways.
Incidentally, not only does Peter hold the view that Joel is an exceptional CEO, he’s also supportive of the recent CR, the APIRX transaction and who knows what other issue you’ve raised during your exhaustive tenure as an armchair analyst.
I find it interesting we often observe a crescendo of noise at the lowest price points, yet those who create this noise are incapable of or unwilling to debate the facts.
By the way, I’d been contemplating ignoring HC this year, but you two have invigorated me.
Thanks.
Expand
