Waldo,It would be great to hear your interpretation of the announcement, rather than casting insults. I just sent the peoples board an email yesterday saying the same. I am wasting my time defending myself to the people that I am supporting...go figure.
Me being on the RES payroll is quite a ridiculous comment and couldn't be further from the truth, as a very basic example, I spent 8 hours yesterday researching and writing a letter for an internal review of the company (it involved reading the 2015 Australian Government takeover panel -again!), in amongst several other. A key consideration for mine was point 108 on page 19. that stated:
108. This case illustrates a wider point in the context of debt clubs and other debt“work-outs”. The relationship between debt and equity providers can becomeblurred when members of the club and their associates hold in excess of 20% of theunderlying equity and/or when they seek support from other security holders. Inour view, it is up to the individual debt providers to ensure that theircommunications and actions do not overstep the mark.
This could be seen as a critical recommendation/ comment set out by the Australian Government at the time of the review, and suggests some guidelines for our board at RES. There is much more to my research and efforts that I do not wish to disclose publicly, but others on this website know my work.
So without going into the depth with what I am organising in the background and what is being considered, your comments are not helping shareholders. i.e. I have placed much energy and time into this cause. Please let me know how you would like to contribute positively if that should be the case.
With regard to the 'Black Knight' comment, when we get RES across the line. Please come back on here and let me know, I might be that stump of a man due to the time and effort this is taking, but I won't be protecting a ditch or a small stream.
For the record, I can understand how you drew those conclusions. No hard feelings!