"I have spoken to at least a dozen potential share holders who told me directly that they would never invest in FNC as long as Peter is CEO"

"Why did it take an alternative slate to make management aware that the company belongs to the share holders?"

Two very interesting points. Rago.

It is interesting to read the heartfelt love/hate statements being made regarding your CEO. I am not a present shareholder here, and the point could be made that, on that basis, I should keep my mouth shut. However, over the last five years or so, I have spent more time as a shareholder than not, made money and lost, and still retain an interest in the potential here. On that basis, I will offer a couple of points for consideration;

1. It is the nature of the human species that whomever wins this proxy thing has their own interests at the head of the list. If Peter gets tossed, the new slate simply gets to rub their hands together and say,( Finally, now it is my turn at the trough). What's the old saying, SSDD, here it is SGDP (same game different people).

2. Unless Sheridan is onside with this new slate, this is an uphill battle, with little chance of success, unless a huge effort can be mounted.

Other than my incessant fixation with NOT, I am a firm believer in not falling in love with your investments. On that basis, I am suggesting this battle is going to take the SP down to .08 before it is resolved. When it is resolved, with a vote, depending on the winner, it will rebound to .16-.20.

On that point, it is worth throwing some dollars at this soon, maybe about the .09 point, purely on an unemotional investment basis.

Best regards

K