Ann: Managing Director Succession, page-3

Whilst certainly a substantial step in the right direction, make no mistake, the last decade has been wasted in this business and will take years to rebuild.

@madamswer seems to relate Korvest’ business performance to industry conditions, I remain firmly opposed to that view.

I have mentioned on many prior occasions that the MD had largely surrounded himself with a passive leadership team, which have equally contributed (through their own inaction) to unwinding the very fabric of this business over several years.

It is very likely that korvest will lose money again this period, or at the very least break even, meaning the well is near dry in terms of funding further dividends.

In addition, I suspect they likely have several million dollars worth of inventory with little to no value which must be brought to account. In the interest of shareholder disclosure, they should be called upon to report all inventories greater than 12 months old at the upcoming AGM.

Summary - passive executive / senior management team ultimately responsible for losing market share, allowing margins to slip, inventories to spiral out of control and systems and process to break down.

Conclusion – the pain phase has only just begun. . . .ahead lies a very, very long list of challenges.

As an aside, I am curious as to whether the MD was pushed or actually resigned, either way, it’s a two fold problem for the Chairman on the following basis –

1. If the MD wasn’t pushed, one can only assume that the Chairman is comfortable with the current position of the business and its management team = problem. . .

2. If the MD was pushed (and it will be revealed in next years annual report under MD remuneration), why has the Chairman not come clean about this = problem. . .