Hi tkc,
The weird thing is the lack of acknowledgment.
I might say - look, I understand that there are serious operational problems here, I understand that I have been misled, but the opportunity is so close and I've been pursuing it for so long that I'm going to opt for stability in spite of it. That's a sustainable position and you are acknowledging reality while adopting vision as a choice.
But instead you see from some what looks like deliberate blindness to operational deficiencies, from others justification out of fear suggesting a want of chutzpah, from others the grotesque rationalisation of dishonesty, and from yet others a willingness to be told what to think. I wouldn't want to stand on that ground.
It is what it is. The desire for conformity, reinforced by professions of adherence probably feels appealing if you are a true believer. But it looks weird and a wee bit repellant if you are on the fence, and might jump towards Wave if you could see a path to a changing governance environment. So the risk is that the visionistas exclude the fencers.
In my view, the folks Wave most needs to stop the price declining are those who observe all aspects of reality and might be persuaded not to sell. The Wave stalwarts hardly matter as they were not going to sell anyway. I'd have worked towards accommodation of people who are concerned, rather than setting up an iconic image of orthodoxy.
| 