Is this a conversation about legal prerogatives or practical matters?
Our experience has mostly been of passive class A investors agreeing to whatever the managers have recommended so long as there is a whiff of hope about the future. Nearly everyone agrees that about the former CEO's stewardship. The same kind of acceptance of hope magnification and goalpost moving satisfied some with the new CEO. Those who haven't liked it have sold long ago.
I am sure the company will take advice from its attorneys to conform with the law. But beyond a meteor strike sort of sale, I don't see any good outcomes for long term stockholders. Solms didn't manage to succeed with the first sort of turnaround (new product accelerates income to match costs). We have moved into a new phase which is to make the most of a bad lot (reduce expenses to match - or nearly match - income).
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
