RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:A Response Both Paul and Dawn appear to be really capable pharma executives. But, neither had much interaction with the financial markets in their careers so they probably have very few candidates they already know that would be suitable for the role they are looking to fill. I second the earlier nomination of Wino but the company can and should also pull on other resources to fill that important role with someone with the appropriate capital markets skills, background and connections.
palinc2000 wrote: One would think with all the years Paul spent in the US that he came across a lot of OUTSTANDING people that he could recruit as Board Members just like he did recently with the new hires....How much leeway does he have? I dont know but a strong withhold votes will help Paul and accelerate the needed changes.
Spceos decision appears to me to be very shortsighted in being overly concerned with his good guy image ....
scarlet1967 wrote: To me it looks like most or all board members excluding Paul are bunch of friends watching each other's back. No diversity at all.
I believe Dawn should resign and replaced by Paul and he should gradually replaced the members with folks with the right skills.
Harsh maybe but necessary imo.
palinc2000 wrote: The decision to replace the former CEO was at least 24 months overdue but it finally happened,,,Paul mhas been on the job for a year only and he has transformed the company in a lot of ways but the transition is still in process ,,,I dont think the Board reflects Paul s idea of an ideal Board(Regardless of what he said to Wino)
scarlet1967 wrote: Applying your logic, the board surly is overlooking the overall performance of the company, in the last few years since the transition started this board has approved the way the company has been conducting their operations so the majority of the members have been in favor of important strategic decision and those who haven’t just kept accepting the decisions. Presuming they made some essential wrong decision both the members who have been in favor and against the decisions are equally responsible for the outcomes, as an engaged member who mostly disagree with the board should resign excluding newly elected members as they haven’t been involved with many decisions but folks who have been there for years and let multiple wrong strategic decisions getting approved are no good IMO. Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice shame on me. Fool me on a regular basis and the shame disappears; we are in wonderland.
palinc2000 wrote: If Gary voted yes he should be replaced since he is the Capital Market guy on the Board...If he voted NO he should resign since he does not have the full confidence of the Board.....So I fail to see the downside in having him removed...
I dont understand you comment about hoping that your vote does not influence the outcome.Why did you vote then?
SPCEO1 wrote: Criticizing my decision to vote for the board is legitimate and I accept it. I am hoping the final tally of the votes will not indicate that my votes would have made the difference. In the end, no matter which way the vote goes, we have clearly made our point and TH's leadership took the time to respectfully listen and respond with some initial corrective actions. So the efforts we made already have made a difference, regardless of the vote. I am not sure voting someone off would have led to more change than we are already seeing. Also, not knowing for sure what Littlejohn's vote on the OO was, I was a little reluctant to fire him when for all we know he may have seen it the way we saw it and was outvoted by others on the board. But, as I said, any criticism of my vote for the board is legitimate and I can tell you I lost some sleep over not holding tight in a united front with many of the rest of you. As you know, a large part of me wanted to go that route but after weighing everything, including the good things this board has brought about, I made the choice I made and hope it turns out to be the best choice. I am well aware it could turn out to be a mistake.