RE: RE: RE: Why the scaremongering? The success or lack of it have no bearing on the placement of CEO. Lori is the only one that has any experience at the position therefore the best choice for the CEO position. Although we may not like her in that position, there is still no choice other than Lori for the CEO position. There is no other option than Lori for the CEO position.
The current treasury being well funded or not also have no bearing on the current situation. Court cost are astronomical. They take time, energy, and astronomical funds. It does not matter who wins/looses the fees will indirectly still be coming out of shareholders pockets. There is no way of winning for shareholders if the legal battle ensues. All their money will end up in some slimey lawyer's pocket. There is a much better option--communication, negotiation and mediation. If these three suggestions are used it does not mean the green team gives up. There must be some solution that can match both parties. Get creative and don't leave the barganing table until all issues are resolved. Getting rid of Lori might not even be an option. There is no replacement.
The green team having 2 seats on the board does not mean they have no power. True they might not be able to vote out Lori, but Lori is obligated to listen to their opinions and be more accountable to the shareholders if the green team took those positions. Isn't that what we are hoping for--more accountability from upper management.