""Replacing the BOD is the single most important issue facing this company - don't let anyone distract you or tell you otherwise.""

"Do you have any concrete solutions to offer in achieving that aim which haven't already been considered and discussed here ad nauseum? If so, please let's hear them. If not, what was the reason for your post?"

Fatwollit, all these guys with their constant "Replacing the BoD" simply don't get it:

1. WHO is able to replace them?

2. HOW could it be done?

3. WHO is responsible for the installment of a new BoD?

4. WHO decides WHICH qualifications the new BoD-members have?

5. HOW does this person/these persons know for sure the new BoD will do a better job in the future?

Of course these five questions are completely of theoretical nature (as well as the BoD-Bashing) because it misses the fundamental point of the way a business is structured:

The management is deciding where the company goes and is responsible for the company's direction every day - the Board of Directors is guiding/controlling/supporting the management on a regular basis but NOT every day.

But what am I talking here, I break my own rule, to shut up as long as I dont have to say something significant.

So sorry for this, I'll try to go in lurking mode until the numbers come out (which by the way I don't expect to be extraordinary because of the strong "Major Reorganization/Streamlining Business/Reducing Operating Expenses"-language of the recent PRs - if those four licenses would have brought significant more money to the table than the licenses before, why then the need for these huge changes in order to save money? IMO the big "hunting" has not started yet...).

Time to go to bed - glty