Steh,
Thanks for your interesting comments; I agree with you about his not caring, but more and more shareholders are coming to realise that. In the end, a SHM has to be held, and KC, on that occasion, has to give an account of what he has done or not done. There are limits to brickwalling and stonewalling!
That is why I have been insisting on getting a SHM fixed, so that the current barriers created by KC's regular absences from Phoenix and his having no known office address in New York, can be overcome -- at least on that occasion. All kinds of pressure can be applied on various fronts.
To that extent, not excluding the updating of financials, he is held to be responsible and has to be held accountable. I am simply saying that -- without my having had any preconceived ideas against KC (it was rather the opposite) -- the idea of sticking indefinitely with an absentee CEO or, even worse, with a CEO for MMXT who appears to treat his well-paid job as a sinecure -- is just not on. In the last analysis, a company belongs to its shareholders and strategic decisions on its future are taken by them. For instance, with or without KC's agreement, the MMXT board was enlarged through the decision of shareholders -- excellent!
There is evidence that, for a few weeks just after KC's appointment, he did put in some work, on the EFF question, after which I find no further evidence of any constuctive action or presence. It's all absence, silence, flight. IMO, that's no way at all to be CEO of MediaMax Technologies!
I also think it is right to keep this debate going. So far today (just after close of trading), I find I have contributed 2 out of just 8 posts.
alj14
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
