The "why" Mr Bank left Ci1 shows no proof, facts or evidence of...

The "why" Mr Bank left Ci1 shows no proof, facts or evidence of anything as to why he left, all "WHY" does is it leaves people guessing with a multitude of theories why he left which is a circular argument mostly been a fallacy, never to be known what the true truth is going in circle….

Further more if Mr Banks was a positive catch for Ci1 then, then how was it that the board let him go, given the board has the obligation and duty to act in the best interest for investors. Now you’re suggesting the board is in talks with Mr Banks, how does that not make the board position compromised and weak ie, so Mr Banks wasn’t good enough then as a COO roll but today he’s good enough for a CEO job, REALLY? I’ll pass


Sounds like to me a lot of hypocrisy going on and stuff that doesn’t at all make sense…… and frankly most of the board are a part of the reason Ci1 is in a compromised position today let alone having faith and confidence for the board making ANY RIGHT CHOICES for CEO …..


not professional DYOR