nits & that
shute - is the exec comp not a sub-part of the overall emp. comp plan? i don't know the answer, but stand by the belief that any comp plan designed in 1994 was designed for a "development stage" corp.
i mentioned Snack's $300 comment (& know full well that you were not predicting that price, just saying it was possible (& as such makes the 1994 plan even more inappropriate IMO)). but a price of $0 is equally "possible" in 5 years (i don't think it's likely, but it's nevertheless possible).
24, the smoky room metaphor assuredly had a "basis in reality" when the Founders' Shares deal was done (& not disclosed for something like six months).
i don't find it unreasonable to be cautious & skeptical based on such prior dealings. i'm willing to give the benefit of some doubt (as i posted it is possible that entirely legit bases exist for this move).
but the prior disclosure argument is brand new (i only recall mentions of the H shares) & the cost-savings contention of doing a 2d proxy in a month is nonsensical.
there may be some other reason for this maneuver & i don't know what that reason is (wish i did).
do you know?
SPIN
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
AI
