No, the debtor that was likely in cahoots with the single...

No, the debtor that was likely in cahoots with the single offtake partner started it.

Calderwood closed the doors to everyone. It IMO was criminal and would in no single possible scenario have ever generated the best possible outcome for shareholders or creditors - the sole primary objective of a MD and CEO.

I held KAI before the appointment based on my personal opinion of nearology potential, I sold because I do not believe a long term hold when either Mark Calderwood or Klaus Eckhof are involved in the management of the business.

Mark Calderwood demonstrated carelessness when operating a business (as noted as an Alita Shareholder).

Klaus Eckoff has demonstrated potential hazard when dealing in contract, as I am currently experoencing in his dealings with Mr Simon Cong in the DRC. A work in progress. He also completely dumped the motherload of shares in market at the point he left AVZ, cratering the share price for a considerable period of time and eroding shareholder value after he left.

KAI as a business I diverge from other critics here, I believe has good ground. However I have concerns Calderwood poses a threat in active management, and Eckoff poses a threat at the point he exits KAI, and in the later years should he play a part in any formation of contract during his time with the company.

It is my personal opinion and not investment advice, that if I were to hold KAI now (I dont, I sold at 4.1c) that I would be on hold, not exitting. Better pricing is likely ahead. But not significantly enough in the short term to justify anything less than a 8 month buy and hold.