Hey RaviWe have no evidence that JH is mixed up in the coup,...

Hey Ravi

We have no evidence that JH is mixed up in the coup, though it's clearly evident the coup leaders were looking to keep JH and punt the rest.

The board has given no reasons for JH's termination and will now hide behind the veil of "can't discuss it, it's subject of litigation" to avoid doing so. Board minutes are not public documents, to my understanding, so unless they are subpoenaed and tendered as evidence in the court action against JH's termination, we will not know what positions were taken during critical discussions regarding company strategy.

This issue about JH's could be as simple as JH resisting an offer that was not in our best interests. Of course we don't know, because no offer has ever been put to shareholders, but if a potential JV partner was offering peanuts and assume JH's recommendation to the board was that it was unacceptable, the board can either accept his recommendation, reject his recommendation or direct him to negotiate further. If they rejected his recommendation they could override him if the majority of the board voted to accept the proposal.

Even if the board was split evenly, the chairman gets the casting vote, so I don't buy the inference that it required the removal of JH to enable them to do a deal.

As for the employment of Dalton, does anyone know who picked him? I'd be guessing JH, but I don't know for sure. I don't think he's been there long enough to be a player in all of this. I would think he's pretty safe regardless ofnwhichbside prevails.

The board was already subject to a first strike at the last AGM, they've been on notice for a while that the natives are restless. Perhaps they thought by punting JH they could blame him and take the heat from themselves.