Replies to post #24721 on Box Ships Inc (TEUFF)

[munhoi]

I believe Mr. Chu has already suggested to the CEO this is what he is doing and these are considered to be the same party on both sides of the same transaction and they are considered anti-fiduciary acts against the common and has all but threatened legal actions against the BOD

[munhoi]

it is well known they had been contacting the preferred since last nov 2016 and the rejection of the reverse split may have put a brake on further deals like the recent one with a preferred supposedly unrelated 3rd party

I believe Box lawyers had contacted Mr. Chu and try to pressure him from interfering with BOX etc.

BOX BOD and CEO has to recognize that without senior debt the common shares has voting and decision making priority over the preferred but the CEO's 22% stake makes him attempt to avoid his fiduciary responsibility to the common

ie he is committing anti-fiduciary acts when Mr. Chu has voiced to the BOD of BOX

the CEO needs to make a solution that benefits all the shareholders equally preferred and common

that's what all the legal arguments are being presented to the BOD

[munhoi]

IMHO he already paid himself off by stealing 2 of the BOX ships for nothing and moving them over to Allseas

the CEO finds ways of paying himself at the expense of common shareholders

yes with the exception of the so called meeting invites to Mr. Chu , the CEO has refused to talk to any common shareholder and in the last year only talked to the preferred shareholders so you can see where his anti fiduciary actions against the common has all been at