There is an interesting disconnect in your logic about this company. Normal logic assumes that the Board has a fiduciary responsibility to the shareholders to attempt to maximize profits and share price. Is there any concrete evidence at all with this company that the Board reflects this assumption -- and it is an assumption. In fact, all of the evidence from five years would suggest that the Board wants to depress the stock price to the point where the Board members can buy the company, take it private, and sell off the pieces for three to five times what the public market would permit. The French subsidiary alone is worth more than the whole company at today's prices. Think about it, and even more when a huge loss is reported for this quarter and the price tanks again with discouraged investors. We are getting near the end of the fiscal year and some funds will want to drop this dog because of gains elsewhere -- at least that is the way it works in the world in which I live. Do you really believe you know the motives of Brodsky and Shecter, who control the Board? I doubt it!
"Normal logic assumes that the Board has a fiduciary responsibility to the shareholders to attempt to maximize profits and share price."
This is a fantasy put out by Wall Street for public consumption. As you have indicated, they take any action that are self-serving and those may or may not coincide with the shareholders' interest. I see no contradiction in my statement.