Interesting how Management/CEOs consider Removal of Edwardas Chair without holding a shareholder's vote valid, but removal of other board members to be invalid without shareholder's vote.
Is it only me that finds this hypocritical? or am I understanding things wrong?
Not only Edward Chairman but as I understand he controls over 97% of the voting shares. If my understanding is correct.... I can see the entire management being swept clean, and IMHO, rightfully so. Time for Shareholders to show who's boss.
Government might have some anti-trust issues, but that's completely a different matter.
All just my opinion/view/thinking