i was reading up on the role of a non executive director and thought the bold items to be quite funny.
"Non-executive directors, also known as external directors, independent directors or outside directors,
are put in place to challenge the thinking and performance of a company. Since non-executive directors do not hold C-level or managerial positions, they are thought to hold the interests of the company in higher regard than executive directors,
who may have an agency problem or conflict of interest between management and stockholders."
source:
http://www.investopedia.com/terms/n/non-executive-director.asp#ixzz4JY6KKIVQ
Perhaps DG has pulled up management on their antics and they created the "conflict of interest issue" to get rid of him so it doesn't look like he resigned or was kicked out, which could be detrimental to EVM.
I worked for a JV firm who had a reasonable number of american bosses installed for a stage of a longterm project (pushing out local guys who had significant previous experience etc.). The client was not happy that the long term local managers were replaced by US guys that didn't understand the culture (in our industry), after about 12mths most of them were dismissed from their roles and sent back to the US, however the memo's usually stated they were going home for "personal reasons" or "retiring" (retiring was used so they could get their client bonuses)...
it's all about perception i guess a conflict of interest is more palatable to the market than him being sacked or resigning due to company management.
Its wednesday - you would anticipate something tomorrow or friday - for the katsu's would you not....
