RE:FCU AGM Meeting - Loser of the Year award goes to........
Actually, I called him up to ask whether it was because a full-on proxy fight would be too expensive. He explained that the change of control bonus would have been triggered had his candidates been elected over the incumbents. That would have been close to 3 million for Dev alone, more for the rest of the Board, and all coming out of the company treasury at a time when it's least affordable.
So he did the right thing, threw in the towel and saved us all from a really big expense if his side won, and the cost of the fight to both sides if he lost.
What he did have the balls to do is seriously question the inalienable right of our own management to treat our company like a personal bank, and to do it publicly with his own ID out there. And hopefully, to raise awareness among BCSC, OSC and other relevant agencies that this is a deck stacked against small investors. As a small investor, but a large FCU shareholder, I have no problem with what he was able to accomplish, but I do wish it had resulted in a Board seat or two for watchdog purposes.
Hopefully, there are enough votes withheld to send Dev the message that we shareholders want accountability and transparency in exchange for those high salaries and Board stipends. There is no logical reason for a long shareholder not to want this. If you don't, tell us all why not?