'FISH21049'
While I believe that your negative premise is well-intentioned, I do not agree.
Having served on at least a half-dozen BOD'd during my active career, I can assure you that even ONE Director with opposing views, depending on the forcefulness of the individual, can be HIGHLY effective.
JimLur's capital idea of placing two of the three put forth so far, IMO, could change the incestuous behavior of the current BOD immediately. In 2011 when Campagna's head is on the chopping block, believe me, that after a year of hearing the objections of one or two Directors we are successful in electing, he would get religion damned quick when he realized that the third was being nominated to replace HIM!
I take no issue at this time about the other changes you suggest should be given serious action,however what makes you think that Campagna would be the least bit swayed with his entire hand-picked current Board? Most all the proposed changes you suggest bear directly on Campagna's ability to continue operating his private piggy bank and the power to manipulate current Directors to rubber stamp his ongoing agenda. LOTS OF LUCK WITH THAT!
I further think, although having never seen them, that the Curriculum Vitae of all three of the names mentioned would make Campagna's look mighty slim by comparison. For all you know, ALL three have had prior BOD experience...not that it is essential.
I further believe, that Nasgovitz could be persuaded by interviewing, in person or by phone, to back ALL of them. IF he threw his voting power behind them, to say nothing of his contacts and influence within the institutional community, it would be a landslide.
JMHO
STINVESTOR
