Not sure that letting Crescent in was the wrong decision from Marlauly, it was the weak balance sheet that allowed them in.
They got in and fixed that and allowed shareholders to participate pro rata. Yes they diluted everyone who wasn't cashed up but they should have been if they were watching developments.
It means that the corporate managers got kicked out but I am not sure that was a bad thing. It's not as corrupt as what happened at AWE, MRM, or AAX in the consultancy game those cases were truly appalling cases of managers retaining control at shareholders expense.
Fiduciary duty to shareholders may mean resigning, we need more open approaches to takeovers and less featheringvof their own nests IMO.
Night
Not sure that letting Crescent in was the wrong decision from...
-
- There are more pages in this discussion • 16 more messages in this thread...
You’re viewing a single post only. To view the entire thread just sign in or Join Now (FREE)
