What I posted does not imply that a RS should be effected, not does it imply that it should not be effected.
The question is how the ability of the company to perform would be affected by a RS.
A RS, without proportionately decreasing authorized shares, gives the company the freedom to keep agreeing to horrifyingly destructive financial deals. I wonder if that's what they intend to do?
Given good performance, accompanied by rising market cap, a RS would make the stock price more acceptable to some classes of investors, especially the ones Ted Jenkins was retained to engage with.
I don't think the case for unconditionally opposing a RS is strong. However, if permitting a RS is like handing a bottle to a drunk then it should not be allowed.
I don't know management and board well enough to be able to decide on this. Anyway, as someone has pointed out, the people on this board probably don't hold enough shares to determine the outcome.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
