More nonsense. I'm addressing the term incompetence - providing...

More nonsense.

I'm addressing the term incompetence - providing outstanding and consistent financial results is not incompetence.

"squeeze a few millions out"... More biased rhetoric. Change this to "produce sound value for shareholders with the leading car manufacturer in the US".

"record profits hardly means anything when you're a micro cap".. Maybe if it was one quarterly based on an outlier, but the company has shown sustained results. If you think this hardly means anything then you've got your head in the sand. There must be loads of well managed micro caps producing great revenue and profit margins in their infancy.. why don't you name some that are comparable to CXZ? Good luck with that.

You can view retention of the board as a red flag, that's your opinion - I'm addressing the over the top rhetoric that is completely baseless. In my view, you don't fire a board that are taking modest salaries, who have helped bring a company from the micro cap gutter to a healthy revenue stream.

People here listen to TEP, whose analysis is nuanced and I can see why he wanted a board change - but the way that other people stretch this to associate with words such as "incompetence", "Disallowed" etc.. is based on zero evidence.