I AGREE, MEADETHROAT, BOARD MEMBERS FRED AND TIM MUST GO
Tim, the quintessential but ineffectual nice guy, and Fred, he didn't quite know who to believe and what to stand up for, BOARD MEMBERS are the last deadwood on the rotting BOARD. These BOARD MEMBERS should feel the shame of presiding over the near corpseification of Meade.
They have proven conclusively by the sorry state of Meade today that they have been part of the problem, not the solution. They should have the common sense, and decency to see they have failed stock holders miserably and the best thing they can now do for the good of the company is leave. It is long, long over due.
The BOARD'S lack of oversight is legend. Some interesting things for stock holders to ponder... But first, as a backdrop for those who have not followed this message board for a while, I sent a complaint to "Ethics Point" (listed on Meade's website to report wrong doing) that certain incredibly odd stock transactions and communications with institutional/ mutual fund managers, as demonstrated in conference calls, suggested possible insider trading. I never got a response, and despite official notice the pattern continued.
Now for some things to ponder regarding the BOARD'S continual lack of oversight:
A. Why did the Board continue over time to tolerate leaks of sensitive operational results and other insider information obviously released by company employees within Meade to outsiders?
1) Leaks provided insight into financial results, sometimes many, many months before official disclosure by the company. 2) Leaks chronicled embarrassing details of product development problems, inference of the magnitude of defectives, and production shortfalls. 3) Leaks were released regarding Meade payment problems with vendors. 4) Leaks regarding negotiations for the possible sale of the company or parts of the company were released. The most famous being the pre-announcement of the sale of Meade Europe as attributed to a specific member of Meade Europe's management to an outsider who often reported insider type information in the past.
B. Given these leaks, was the BOARD even curious about insider information getting out? Was the BOARD'S radar up and eyes open as to what might be going on in the company given these leaks? Or, was it as it appearerd, that they were just asleep at the wheel?
C. What was the purpose of these leaks? Who might benefit and why? Did these leaks benefit the stock at all? Are the ethical and legal implications for the company's handling of these leaks, or lack thereof, in keeping with the spirit of Sarbanes-Oxley as well as the alleged insider communications with large investors?
c.i No, for the most part I believe these leaks did not reflect favorably on the company or help its stock price. It was mostly disclosure of bad news or news of dubious stock building value.
c.ii Who would possibly benefit from leaking bad news that might influence a lower stock price? Who? Foremost, management trying to buy the company would potentially benefit in a lower stock purchase value price. So was management trying to buy the company? Yes, the SVP of sales was rumored to be trying to buy the company. Was the Director of Meade Europe also trying to buy that division? I believe the answer is yes, for quite a while, and, in fact, he eventually did buy it.
A number of these leaks about poor Meade performance appeared to be emanating from Europe. Who did the Director of Meade Europe report to? He reported to the SVP of sales. Why didn't the SVP of sales clamp down on this rumor mill? In effect, did he and the management of Europe conspire to allow this activity to continue with the Director of Europe feeding information to his manager knowing it would be given to an outsider who could be fully expected to post the information? Outrageous speculation, you might say. Not so fast, with all the corporate malfeasance and continuing parade of Bernie Madoff types in the financial news, the outrageous has become commonplace and nothing much surprises anyone anymore about what people are capable of.
Where was the BOARD? Missing in action!
c.iii The BOARD continues to turn a blind eye to implications of insider trading as pertains to insider information given to outsiders.
--The very second the sale of Meade Europe was announced by a third party quoting a specific Meade employee, Meade had an obligation to clear the air with a press release. They did not, and instead the Director of Europe tried to deny a company meeting where this information was conveyed, but did not dispute the truth of the rumor, thus fueling even more speculation the rumor was true. The BOARD allowed the market to speculate wildly. The company also did nothing to clear the air in the next conference call.
--In a further validation of the BOARD’S literal scoffing at Sarbanes-Oxley, during the conference call preceding that of the sale of Meade Europe, the CEO would not take any live questions, but instead had Shelly Young of The Piacente Group make a statement. Paraphrasing, Shelly said, management will not take live questions, but directed investors to contact Piacente with their questions. They would then pass them along to Meade management. What Shelly never said was that management would then share any answers provided to individual investors to all investors in a press release. For all any investor knows, Meade could have releasing highly sensitive information to institutional investors regarding the sale of Meade Europe. Meade should issue a press release immediately confirming any questions answered or stating no questions were asked or answered as a result of that conference call.
You seem like a very intelligent person with the inner knowledge of corperate management.
I enjoy reading all of your threads about the meade management or the lack thereof.
anyhow, let me throw this one out there. Lets say that you are the personal advisor to the new CEO, what would you advise him to do to turn meade around?
Please take my above question seriously and write a full report detailing what you think the new CEO should do to turn mead around to the old mead of the early and late 90s that we used to be proud of.