Hello again Plough . Yes you are right in that however good he is and however well he knows the ground he is still subordinate to MD .
I looked at the chart today
I marked the day before David Lim left.
I wasn’t reading here much back then but I know the threads were toxic with accusations of insider trading.
Maybe it was the market simply perceiving a slow ramp up or maybe it was something more sinister or both.
Simetimes with scrupulous companies people are asked to leave even if they say something out of good intention to people they have developed strong relationships with but who are not involved with the company.
The Reuter’s page says more than 43 million institutional shares were traded in the last three months.
Meanwhile conjecture about the past doesn’t change the present and the hypothetical theorising is only offered as an objective alternative view.
Your postulations on misallocation of machinery due to disempowerment of Kerr (also causing the retirement of a similarly frustrated director ) imply argument within the company rather than solidarity along with leadership squabbles.
You obviously speak from a position of experience and I respect this even though other postulations might also be drawn.
Currently I will stick to my theory of everyone living happily ever after with a solid and communicative team in place as it suits my confirmation bias and I would have to quit my shares if I did not trust the management .
But I see the value of the glass half empty approach and appreciate you sharing your views as these sharpen my own
