InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 4
Posts 119
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 06/12/2015

Re: fbg0316 post# 9072

Sunday, 12/04/2016 3:19:09 PM

Sunday, December 04, 2016 3:19:09 PM

Post# of 108192
FBG, even your argument that Dan was unethical in that original raise is not on solid ground because you don't know the nature of the discussions with the previous BOD or not the new investors. It could be that some of the previous BOD who rejected the compensation plan were being obstructionist to securing Dan's services. Other members on the BOD realized they would lose Dan and their best chance for salvation without the deal. So, those forward-thinking BOD members arranged for the new shareholders. Doing this SAVED The then current shareholders. Of course, I'm speculating. But, so are you.

If it's possible to imagine a scenario that does not have serious ethical issues, why assume one that does? Without Dan, the company would almost certainly have failed. Therefore, the deal to keep him was the right deal for the shareholders.

Now, referring to everyone who does so, can we stop with the Dan compensation caveats on so many posts here? Anyone considering investing in ADXS will review the history and see the recapitalization and management compensation issues, as they are all spelled out in the 10Ks. The reason for my request is they clutter the board when what we need is NEW information and NEW insights.

Thanks, all. And welcome Ignatius. I hope you and a few others from the YMB diaspora settle here

Volume:
Day Range:
Bid:
Ask:
Last Trade Time:
Total Trades:
  • 1D
  • 1M
  • 3M
  • 6M
  • 1Y
  • 5Y
Recent ADXS News