Originally posted by Thesi
Don't misconstrue what I have to say as a personal vendetta, I am just perceiving it as a potential strategy for the company.
He seems ok, but then, who is affected when the company doesn't perform?
Anthony with his inability to be voted out, or Martin whose neck is on the line.
I am not saying he should be voted out, but I am pointing towards the fact that he was almost voted out last time with a gasp from the crowd.
You can draw from that what you want but I don't have a personal vendetta against him at all.
Though what I will say is that as the chairman he should rise up for all of the holders otherwise his tenure will undoubtedly end as a strike against the company.
I can point at the sign on the wall, you either read it or you don't.
What I am pointing out is how differently this has been managed by comparison to the Jiangsu transaction that at the time from what I understand they placed the company in one of the longest trading halts ever to hold the company together.
To dispute what I am saying here you would be seen to be saying that I would rather have a share price here than up around $3.20.
That would be illogical.
So yeah, I am questioning the company strategy.
Had they come out of the trading halt tomorrow with a plan to do a share buy back then that would have made a significant difference but they didn't, they had no plan.
But you're happy, that's good. (For you)
As someone (might have been you) suggested tonight, I think the directors are running the company like a private company. That's what I was wondering when I started a new thread a month ago 'What is behind our Galaxy's falling share price?' My sentiment after the last few days has changed and I am going to start offloading a few shares myself because I agree with you that the company seems to be leaving a bit to be desired as far as strategy and communications are concerned. And I reckon I'll be having a good look at the contributions of Martin Rowley and other board members with a view to voting at the AGM in May against the reappointment of some board members and certainly against any suggestion that they should be further rewarded by way of additional options or whatever at the AGM. I mean if we aren't going to be rewarded by a robust share price, then why should they? If enough retailers think the same it won't be enough to make a difference but at least will send a message.
