"Short sellers are clowns"
I don't think so. I was right, you were wrong. What say you now, hockeyplyr22 pumper?
I'm pretty simple minded. I prefer a higher stock price to a lower stock price. I believe if JANA had won, the stock would be higher. The evidence is simple -- price action in anticipation of their win, and the reaction to their loss. So, if they, or anyone else comes around, I'll vote for them. The vote buying, in particular, really rankled me, so this BOD will never have my support (BTW, to all those who took C.25 a share to vote yes, how is that trade working out for you?).
But I, like pretty much everyone else reading this board, don't own enough shares for it to matter, so I guess its nothing more than just crying in our beer, isn't it?
"I cannot divulge my sources at this time. They requested that they remain anonymous."
So, U are questioning his reporting with the same level of lame reporting. Grow a life. You don't know anything. At least he is with a reputable news organization; U are just a bozo trying to pump on a yahoo board.
"This proxy book is bigger than the Bible"
But it contains much more fact and truth than that fairy tale.
The fact that a contract contains a warranty does not logically imply that that warranty has not been violated. While intelligent people may agree or disagree as to whether or not an investigation is occurring (and a highly reputable news organization has reported such), calling someone an "absolute idiot" for taking action, when it is you, in fact, that has got the logic wrong, is totally uncalled for, and demonstrates the level of your intellect (if any).
Up til now, I was willing to give mgmt the benefit of the doubt. But, after wasting shareholder money on this vote buying business (and I know its not alot of money in the grand scheme of things), I've decided to support JANA. I don't have alot of shares, so it won't make a difference, but I'm hoping other shareholders agree. The whole thing seems sleazy (and I imagine there is a reason it is apparently illegal in the US), and says to me that mgmt is not content to stand on their record, so, I'd like to see JANA win, to send a message that you need to stand on your record, not the apathy of shareholders who are not paying attention.
(BTW, I wonder, if under Canadian law, JANA could do the same thing, or is this a built in advantage for the incumbent mgmt? This is all new to me).