20 November 2011
CH/POV • On Decisions, Motives & Shareholder Participation
Sometimes . . .
As an officer and director of the company, I will continue to act in what I believe to be the best interests of the company as a whole. Sometimes these decisions are to ensure survivability. Sometimes they are to aid in the continued development and desire for growth. Sometimes these decisions may have a short term effect, as sometimes these decisions will be perceived as positive, and sometimes they will be viewed as negative.
And sometimes there will be disagreement over which one is more true than the other - disagreements among and even within: affiliated entities with which the company is doing, or is seeking to do business; employees of either the affiliated company and/or this company; and, finally, disagreements among and even within the investors and shareholders - the last two of these not always being the same thing, whereby the latter often assumes they are the first.
The only thing these four groups share in common is the desire for the company it succeed - the how and why are often very different from one another; as it is also common that not only will each measure success differently from the other, each of these groups carries a different motive, even though they might sometimes think they are the same, or occasionally share common ground with another. As such, it is not always possible to please everyone all the time, and any assumption that we could is a utopian dream, even though we base each decision with the intent to do so.
In conclusion, I will reiterate that we the officers and directors of the company, including myself, will continue to act in what we believe to be the best interest of the company as a whole; and we hope that most will share our vision while we try to keep those opposed to a minimum.
*Note: Some may have questions or concerns and we will do our best to address them on a case-by-case basis.
Establishing a Line . . .
As it relates, I wish to make it clear that it is inappropriate for me or anyone affiliated with the company to discuss future decisions the company might make outside of supposition of what might be. When it comes to the actual decision, or the actual dealings, shareholder involvement is not only inappropriate, it is also potential interference.
While the motive of verification of material information is understood, it is interference nonetheless and has in fact caused damage in some cases, despite the assumption of innocent inquiry or clarification. The unfortunate result of this continued action has caused us - the management of this company as well as the affiliated business with which we are doing, or seeking to do business - to rethink how much and when we disclose verses our desire and obligation to do so.
This should not be viewed as a threat or punishment, or that the company will suddenly go quiet. Rather, it is a reflection upon our excitement and fervor allowing many to become too exposed to the day-to-day inner workings of the company and how that exposure has inadvertently effected business or the overall market's perception of things in general.
Or goal is to minimize (or ideally, eliminate) this going forward; we’re just not sure how as of yet. ~ rtb
