Where is the negotiation? It would seem reasonable to me that if a party, in this case Pelham, brings forward a proposal, the other party (Nickel 28), should try to negotiate.
not only once, but twice did Pelham came with a proposal, and twice it was rejected by Nickel 28.
Management is at a turning point. Many shareholders (true, I do not know how many that is) are concerned about management diluting the cie for their benefit. Management in trying to change their compensation now because yes they feel the pressure. Directors did not stop the practice and are now concerned about their directorship with the company. Yet, and obviously, all of them voted against Pelham proposals without counter offering.
Pelham wishes to have 3 board members appointed from their roaster. Is this loading your hand before you start playing? That would mean the CEO or President, plus one of their current directors, against Ned C. and two of their nominees. Perhaps it should be 2 each side plus one more chosen by an independant group, if such a process is feasable.
That the A group renounces to all stock-based compensation received in 2022 is a lot. They should be entitled to some....and this needs to be negotiated.
That Nickel pays for Pelham expenses incured is ludicrous.
In the end, we are in a scenario where tension is rising and management should open the door to negotiations. If nothing satisfying turns out from those negotiations, management can still reject I am afraid that if Nickel management does not open the door for negotiations it will become nasty! I sincerely hope and look forward for a positive resolution between now and the agm.