Corp .. If you keep wading in with your chin sticking out and with your hands by your side you are going to get popped each time. Is English a second language for you or are you some kind of masochist??
Danny- "outdated" was your word and your pretext for dismissing the valid and serious criticisms by these constituencies.
Here is what I actually said:
My straight up answer is that the opinions you quote are outdated.
Try as you might, all of the comments you quoted about excessive compensation, with exception of Heartland who remains our largest shareholder, are from 2003. I would call something from 2003 outdated and I expect every rationale, objective thinking, individual here would think the same except for those who to do so would weaken their rationale to the shareholders that the company needs to be sold to someone who can do a better job. You are the most clear cut example of the latter that I have ever seen on Jim's IDCC boards.
The commentary in your post regarding recent compensation excesses are assertions by you and you alone that matters have gotten even worse. TC hasn't so stated, none of our other five covering analysts have even weighed in on the subject of current compensation excesses at IDCC nor has ISS.
As for the last shareholder votes, only the first was clear-cut and conclusive .. which I admitted at the time. My recall is that the big unknown on the remaining two is how those who didn't bother to vote would have voted. Historically, abstentions at all companies have always been overwhelmingly considered by WS to be blanket endorsements for the BOD positions. While that technically is no longer the case I doubt that actual shareholder voting practices in that regard have changed much. Can you provide some evidence that abstentions on balance now mean a blanket no vote on BOD positions?
No mas, yet?
MO,
Danny
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
