I have been watching the discussion and discontent on this...

I have been watching the discussion and discontent on this thread over recent weeks about POH lifting its game - letter to the board, dumping the chairman etc.

The discussion has been kept alive by about a dozen posters - wonder if their total holding in POH would amount to 1% ?

On the other hand, the big holders such as Orbis and Ingalls and Snyder do have the numbers to influence POH drastically if they wanted to do so. If they acted together they could put anyone they wanted into the chairman's position.

If the stirrers really want to shake up POH then they need to get Orbis and Ingalls and Snyder on side (if they can) and then not just write letters to the board but challenge the board; propose an alternative chairman and new board members and get them elected.

But at the moment I see no signs of discontent amongst the large holders - and don't forget Orbis has been a holder for a long time - they have probably seen the value of their stake eroded considerably over the past year or so.

So if the big blokes aren't unhappy, does this mean they are just more patient than the stirrers - or more preceptive ?