ZmansSharon introduced NMDC on the premise that they were to...

Zmans

Sharon introduced NMDC on the premise that they were to assist Legacy in growth (and yes, this included funding).

Who, then, should be held accountable if the introduction of NMDC has been a failure or a non-event?

The answer is obvious.

She deserves every criticism, because the expectation was that NMDC would help facilitate growth. Were these expectations met?? Absolutely not.

Holders have every right to be "bitchy" about the level of her salary, especially when they have openly disclosed that they are down on their investment.

When a holder is financially down Zmans, he/she has every right to scrutinize management and determine whether they are worth their salary.

I agree with Omo and others; Sharon is overpaid for what has been delivered on behalf of holders so far.
How could you disagree with this?!!!