InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 11
Posts 774
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 10/01/2012

Re: ivfk post# 24721

Monday, 10/16/2017 1:12:48 PM

Monday, October 16, 2017 1:12:48 PM

Post# of 29042
it is well known they had been contacting the preferred since last nov 2016 and the rejection of the reverse split may have put a brake on further deals like the recent one with a preferred supposedly unrelated 3rd party

I believe Box lawyers had contacted Mr. Chu and try to pressure him from interfering with BOX etc.

BOX BOD and CEO has to recognize that without senior debt the common shares has voting and decision making priority over the preferred but the CEO's 22% stake makes him attempt to avoid his fiduciary responsibility to the common

ie he is committing anti-fiduciary acts when Mr. Chu has voiced to the BOD of BOX

the CEO needs to make a solution that benefits all the shareholders equally preferred and common

that's what all the legal arguments are being presented to the BOD