Emailed chairman’s letter to shareholders, page-43

Does anyone want to discuss this letter rationally ?

FWIW (as someone who has followed recent and some historic company activities).

I think Faillace uses main part of this email to vent at and bully Ross Love.
He is clearly disappointed the current  board used a legal technicality to block him and so it comes actoss to me as mostly rant.
Because he has devoted so much space to this I suspect it is designed to further put the wind up shareholders and other directors.
And as he has effectively said he has Rick Deurloo on side, I expect the main target is  Brian Wall

(who has  allready  emailed  he just wants everyone to play nice and not have ugly battles) (see Drake email chains,  and also nb the scoffing comment (now deleted ) from the insider poster @rpg who sneered at Wall saying  ’he just blows in the wind’.) ​

Ît is only near the end that  he gets on to some forward looking strategy.

He writes;
….Company is at a crossroad right now.
We do not have time for this Board to deliberate and stall, with the outcome almost assuredly being more of the same. ​

Decisions need to be made now. ​

Key staff need to be retained. ​

Those with real aerospace experience need to be consulted with and listened to immediately. ​

How can this Board be trusted with the key functions you mention when it will not even honor its own agreements?
How can we trust that there will be no more delaying and technical gimmickry related to calling the AGM in a
normal, timely manner?
You began your Letter by saying that “SMS is a great company.” ​

Look at the performance of the share price. ​

Cheerleading does not make something a reality. Structural Monitoring Systems can be great in the future but not without real, immediate, and lasting change. ​

Enough is enough.
SMS Shareholders deserve better than this. ​

Call the meeting.
Anthony Faillace​

Well - speaking of cheer leading as he does - there’s  a fair bit more waving  of pom poms  even in that section.

…And I feel the company’s current price might be a fair bit higher if Faillace had participated in the capital raise (but supporting the company then clearly did not fit his strategy to acquire control).​

So basically the letter says he has majority of shareholders behind him and wants to lose Mclarty and Wright now.

(But why on earth does he feel a company secretary who has worked for SMN from the start requires  ‘aerospace experience’ rather than public company secretarial duties experience?)​

And he says - despite  wanting to lose the secretary - that  “key staff” need to be retained ?
Ouch ?  - He’s talking about Rich Poutier here I guess?

Has he based this opinion on Poutier’s performance to date?
​

That there is no mention how his proposals offer a better alternative to the restructure plan so recently put in place.
No mention of any proposals at all, including how he proposes to fund SMN going forward.

You were right Rendawg … I am pretty sure your post the other day was on the knocker;
“You lose. You can’t spin this one. We have the numbers”

So much for politeness and I wonder what his hurry is ?

Just my thoughts
Good Luck to all

cheers