MM,I think you've done a better job than most at understanding...

MM,

I think you've done a better job than most at understanding where I am coming from.

And yes, there's a lot of water under the bridge and much questionable activity and little, if any results.

You are also right that we should expect that Mr Goodall's presence on the board SHOULD see some more positives for shareholders. It would appear, on the face of it, that having a proper large firm auditor will help to straighten out some of the issues.

I don't think it is far from, as you put it, "a self enrichment before everything else" as has been evidenced by bonuses paid when funds were desperately needed and the resistance and shenanigans when shareholders dared to propose independent directors. And when they exited, as is their right, they were blamed for all of the ills of the company. Right now, it isn't possible to exit, realistically.

Just in case some readers remain factually challenged, from the period when there were shareholder director candidates proposed, there are only 2 directors who remain. Coincidentally, or otherwise, they are also the same 2 directors who received 6 figure bonuses based around a magical profit that disintegrated even before the bonuses were paid.

I do live in hope something will change, but I think that while the powers that be remain in control, why would things be any different? We're now 2 years in to the disgrace that has been coined "Gohgate". Was this a contrived deal to prevent shareholders from exercising their legal rights? And now, rather than buy shares, why are the directors LENDING money at extortionary rates of interest? If this is not "excessive gains", I am not sure what is. And to top it all off, why did the directors increase their own salaries by 400%-500%, while we're still losing money?

And while the price languishes near zero, the market has judged the company. And while it is a small company, that should be easy pickings for the big boys to swallow up and yet they haven't. If we have the "disruptive technology" we believe we have, why has it only been disruptive to us?

MM, of all of the people on HC who are "supportive" of the management (I assume you are), your view is the only one which appears to be based around some facts. To me, this kind of debate is what should be being had.