None of us know how many votes Ian Gandel controls - neither you nor any other poster here. All of the Company actions listed in my prior post have been legitimate valid choices. It therefore appears that the only reason you have to replace Board members is because the share price is low and you don't like them - but the actions being taken by the Company will still need to be taken anyway. You make unprovable statements like IG controls the BoD - when an alternate reasonable conclusion would be that the BoD members actually agree on the path forward that has been undertaken based on their own perception of the merits.
It remains a matter of subjective opinion as to whether hedging was a better long term path, or a capital raise. The reason it remains unprovable is because we cannot run future share price scenarios, we can only see facts as of today. As of today, the argument appears to favour a Cap raise instead - but the future has not yet happened.
ALK is no nightmare for me - it is a highly promising, and likely very profitable holding in my portfolio.
I rate the management team very highly. They made me large profits when I sold ASM shares at over $10. They have generated the Boda Kaiser resource, which will deliver significant profits in the future. Their dogged determined work found something that other majors did not find. They are successfully upgrading Tomingley, and will mine it for a decade - and much longer.
They represent a safe pair of hands for my investment dollars at this point in time, and with the knowledge I currently have.
ALK Price at posting:
43.0¢ Sentiment: None Disclosure: Held
(20min delay)