Wow, a non-shareholder who had every opportunity to call a board meeting, at which the board could have any discussion he requested on an agenda, is putting all this crap into the public arena instead. What is his agenda? Clearly he has one and It's sure not for the public shareholders.

As a shareholder, and a shareholder who has been one much longer than him, I can tell you I have real issues with this, and not only because he's driving the stock price down.

Clearly, he was the source of info for Rago1 (who said he was talking to someone in the company, who said he's been alienated from Peter, so who else would have been leaking info to him, particularly about a possible dissident circular). He's been talking outside the appropriate bounds of confidentiality for his position IMO and this is the guy raising issues? - clearly to gain control of the board, versus any benefit for the stock or it's shareholders.

In my opinion, Granger while acting as Chairman of the Board did not act in a manner consistent with his fiduciary respsonsibilities, and in fact operated in a highly questionable manner, not in keeping with his position as Chairman of the Board. Let me just say, he's lucky it's not me on the FNC board, because I surely would be going after him for what I consider to be his highly inappropriate disclosure of confidential information, behaviour and actions contrary to the best interests of the shareholders while he was on the FNC board of directors.

There is no way in h*ll I'd vote for Granger.