I am always suspicious that new members suddenly appear having a...

I am always suspicious that new members suddenly appear having a strong position and then on a stock they claim they do not hold. 

However in the interests of answering all questions:

When Interprac joined their NPAT was almost twice that of SEQ prior to that . Garry Crole was already a director of SEQ and joined after the very successful Diversa process in which he played a key role as I understand it. Diversa was reshaped , refocused and after a few acquisitions all shareholders made a very good return when it was sold to One Vue.

The profits before 2017 had been patchy and in fact if you take the 5 years before the interprac acquisition (2013 to 2017) then 2013 - loss $1,6 m. 2014 (restated) profit $0.3m, 2015 (adjust) Loss $1.0 m, 2016 Profit $0,3m , 2017 Profit $0,7 m , 2018 Profit $2,4 m. So since GC joined the company has done very well.

It is interesting to note that Garry Crole joined on 16 November 2016 and was a part of the company since then. That was a year before the interprac deal even happened. So I doubt that as the board didn't include any other Interprac director that the boardroom has changed. So if the composition of the executive board did not change as a result of the Interprac deal you have to look elsewhere.

What is the catalyst - The only catalyst that I can see is SB resigning on 6 months notice as CEO. That announcement to the market on 9 November 2018 seems to have been the trigger. There is always a reshuffling of seats when the leader goes. I once did resign as MD of a large subsidiary of a listed entity and the new owners wanted to keep me on the board as they were going to list it separately. It didn't work - The management were confused loyal to me but trying to serve the new MD. In the end they paid out my 6 months contract and we both agreed that it didn't work.

So now to your challenge about experience:

The headline in appointing him in 2016 was " Sequoia bolsters Board with key appointment"

In the 1990s GC was one of the founders of Deakin Financial Planning an ASX listed company that was later acquired by IOOF. Garry Started Interprac Financial Planning Pty Limited which is a leading independently owned AFSL. 

The then Non executive Chair ( Michael Carter) -  said "We are delighted to have attracted Garry Crole to the SEQ Board. Garry is a high quality financial services professional who is very well regarded and someone who will compliment the SEQ Board extremely well"

he added: "As Sequoia enters an important growth phase, we are increasingly committed to expanding and strengthening our governance and support to the business. We look forward to leveraging off Garry's considerable public company experience and his skills and business acumen in financial services as we accelerate our growth".

The team around Garry has a lot of experience as I see it. 

So maybe the real issue is unified:

I think GC has displayed too much unity. Its clear that he has struggled with dissent from shareholders who emanate from Interprac, it seems. However has decided to vote in favour of the resolution - The only issue in the fight is whether the ex CEO should remain as a Non executive director. Personally I think boardrooms should not be public but they should not be unified - group think all agreeing isn't what makes boardrooms effective. In fact the only rule I remember was "you may disagree but don't become disagreeable". It has to have robust debate at times and as you are always having competing ideas and a limited resource base you do want to see passion.

This incident is affecting the share and probably the morale of the group we need to get beyond it.

I wanted to be a shareholder in Interprac but was not invited to the party but did try. Really the person requesting the 249 doesn't seem irrational or  to have an agenda other than to see the CEO who resigned depart the stage as I see it.

So lets understand you motives:

SEQ is your first post after joining on 11 January 2019. This is also your only post. Interesting screen name - greatest general to some.

You don't own the stock but you would prefer a more unified and experienced team. 

I think we would have one if this gets dealt with but find it strange that this is your first and only post on HC. I would love to debate this.