Hi dig,
I used to think Feeney was the guy to hold the discipline together. But maybe that is not (or no longer) the case.
I think someone with money and the power that yields in investment form - and who could apply discipline to the company via a seat on the board and maybe through the appointment of a cfo - is perhaps a key to the solution after all.
Someone has to break what appears to be the Sprague grip and remove the private purpose from this public company. Having changed the board - which seems entirely unresponsive to shareholders' concerns - I also think exposure of governance decisions to CC review is critical. They must explain, or the problem repeats. They only have to read the Wave board to figure this out.
Let SKS stay in some shape or form. But let him be made responsible for his performance and chained to normal measures and consequences. It seems a bit hopeless to let a person evade the wrath of shareholders who have been led down one garden path or another forever. I think we are owed a dose of reality from someone for whom failure to do so results in removal from office. And then they must learn to listen and respond to what they hear in some effective way.
And this year, we know he will pull another speculative rabbit out of his hat at the SHM to mollify the shareholders. As he has always done. The hope cycle generates increasing irritation over time if its harvest is always disappointment.
| 