Just a question, who would you rather be when it comes to having your arse on the line legally, Kevin Donovan or Lee Cole.
I would rather be Lee Cole as his exposure is minimal. He did not during this mess wear the Hat of Co-chair and CEO.
While on the BOD he also had a fudiciary responsibility with Sterling LLP and based on his letter as a contractor of services to EGMI seems he did the right thing(s) to insure that procedures put in place were followed.
It is KD that without the oversight of the Lord Steinberg that became the cowboy thinking he WAS the ORGANIZATION as opposed to a PART of the organization that represented the interest of shareholders. Now KD last press release said EGMI is investigating strategic alternatives due to not being able to verify the RIC funds. I find the term strategic alternatives interesting. So they have hired Price Waterhouse Coopers to do a forensic accounting of the circumstances. --This seems like KD trying to buy an opinion of a prestigious CPA firm to justify his actions. I think PWC might just give him an opinion that he may not like. Lets see KD spooks the past CPAs and TATTLES to the SEC and when the dust settles NO Material Change. Then to add more trouble for KD with material events requiring 8-K reporting in hand, (letters of resignation from 2 board members) he delays/withholds the information and files 8-Ks to announce these changes seriously late.
Just my opinion, but I would feel far more comfortable in Lee Cole's shoes than Kevins. ALSO What should LC have done, what would YOU have done if you were powerless, but YET had a contract to provide professional services to EGMI and the Co Chair and CEO was asking you to do Unprofessional actions against policy. I think LC had little in options---and in the end it will be KD that gets SEC sanctions and legal issues--that is when the SEC can tear itself away from other online diversions.
AI
