I would much prefer the add-on favorable announcement to propel the share price.
Chioini should be required to Reimburse RMTI for its atty and other fees related to its bad faith attempt to muzzle shareholders . The entire BOD should be replaced for authorizing this lawsuit .
WE must ask ourselves WHY Rob is so petrified of having ONE outside director on the board? What is he afraid of? If he has nothing to hide why is he fighting so hard to prevent ONE outside director?
Yesterday Glass Lewis endorses Richmond board nominee, stock up 5%. Today court rules against Rockwell, stock up 4% early on. I think it is evident which investor sentiment favors.
Just think Richard (RMG) if you were a shareholder you too could vote blue !
There is a lot of hoopla about Mark Ravich, elected as a single board member, depending on your point of view that he is either going to cause delays, etc. etc., or if you are of the other persuasion that he is going to save the day. Truth of the matter the company will be run no different if Mr. Ravich is on the board or not for the next year, and I expect that Mr. Ravich will conduct himself accordingly as a professional knowing this. This is just a warning shot to management that if they don't get their affairs in order before next year shareholders will vote in new BOD's and the shareholders will begin the process of unseating the current BOD and possibly management. I think this warning shot is critical to send, even though nothing will change for the next year no matter which way this goes.
I think there is common agreement that the compensation package is going nowhere and that the compensation package should be reviewed annually, not every three years as management recommends. My thoughts are that as shareholders, if we don't start sending warning shots, what will the compensation packages be that they suggest when the company starts making real money. It is critical that our voice be heard now. From my experience it is pretty difficult to get a low rating from the ISS, however RC and current management has succeeded in doing so.
I commend RC and his ability to get Triferic through the FDA on what I would call the cheap, however you need to monetize it before beginning to take the excessive compensation that he has taken. He came to the public markets to access funds to ensure the lottery ticket that he had could be cashed, I'm sorry but the public market needs to share in that reward, it is no longer a private company.
I voted the blue ballot. I do not believe that this management team or Board of Directors have served the best interests of the shareholders other than possibly themselves through the compensation and stock option programs. I believe that the CEO has no clue how to introduce a new product to the market. I believe that not comprehending that the processing of Calcitrol was not being properly done is a management error lacking the appropriate discipline and control over the contract manufacturer. I believe the the disagreement with Baxter and the lack of detail regarding the issues is a complete management failure. Doesn't Baxter own a substantial number of shares? I wonder how they will vote. Bad management, poor planning, worse execution.
Chioni and his syncophants 'injunction request DENIED --AMEN --
Is the purpose of this upcoming important vote to punish or to vote for someone who can step right in with knowledge of this industry and make a difference? I have struggled with this vote. In fact last night I used the white proxy vote and went online and changed my vote to the request of Rockwell.
This was a difficult vote for me as a long term shareholder -- 16 years. Rockwell has taken an idea all of the way to FDA approval -- Triferic. A very difficult task. I look at all of the government hurdles Rockwell has successfully jumped over the past several years and I say what is the purpose of changing?? Yes, Rockwell needs to improve its public relations. However, I feel we are close to a decision on transitional add-on. So the bottom line is are we here to punish, which in turn could slow the entire process even more? OR are we here to make decisions that move the company forward.
Rockwell may be learning a lesson to be more transparent. I am betting that this will be the case.
To appoint Ravich to the board probably will create a lot of animosity and slow the process even more. Therefore, I am voting on Rockwell's behalf but they need to step up their game which includes being more transparent!!
New press release today on Court order to stop the Blue vote! The Blue's have won and the court agrees. What I ask from RMTI management what are you trying to hide with multiple white ballots sent, endless contact to vote white and negative character of your denial of our right to vote Blue! You haven't performed, taken massive stock options or taken calls from shareholders, WHAT DO YOU EXPECT! In fact if blue wins and still nothing in the next year we will vote out leadership.
Someone posted discussion regarding whether it would be good or bad for the stock price, if Richmond or the company won. Who knows, but my opinion is Richmond will be better for the stock. ISS and Glass Lewis are looked to by institiutional money and if it looks like the shareholders are taking RMTI in a direction that will promote better governance, etc. then I think institutions will view RMTI more favorably.
FYI...RB just won the first round in court today that was to block the proxy. So all votes will count.
Just a question ? I know that most are here for Triferic, but my question is about Calsitriol. I could find my answer but some might know without to much research. Back when Calsitriol was launched I believe that management made the decision to build inventory before they took orders. They were afraid that the demand would be great and they would not be able to keep up. Then everything fell apart and we're back to now. So when we get back on track with FDA and a contract manufacturer or two, is Rob going to say that we won't take orders until we have adequate inventory? Has he addressed this ? I do know on the Triferic side he said we have plenty of inventory. Thanks in advance.
Just so everyone knows there is another Yahoo Reader on the board other than myself and Sahmdars. My guess its Richard (RMG) ,he has the same narrative. Regardless the bashers will take ID's from shareholders from time to time. It is just another underhanded dishonest way to fool shareholders who have already figured out their motives.
Glass Lewis endorses Ravich...leading proxy advisor Glass Lewis has joined ISS in endorsing Ravich for the board and voting down board recommendations on compensation. Their key finding: "In short, we consider Rockwell's history of poor returns is an open and shut case, even when affording the board the benefit of its preferred and heretofore absentee benchmark.”
Now if we think we are divided on this board can you imagine what it will be on the BOD with one member obstructing and objecting trying to slow the progress and turn it toward another direction. Think about it ..it will not be a voice of reason just one of decent. BTW there is a rumor floating in our area among investors who own Rockwell that one of RB biggest ( owns a really large block of stock with RB ) is voting against Mr. Ravich . They apparently have met him personally and thinks he is the wrong candidate for the BOD he would have voted another candidate and objected to RB nomination of him. So you can see even among their own clients Mr. Ravich can not garner the support of a investor who has been with Rockwell in the 1 and 2 PPS. If Mr. Ravich can not bring him in the fold and he has already voted against him , RB loses a larger percentage of their block and possibly this investor moving to a new firm. It is a rumor and I do not usual share rumors , yet it struck me as odd that RB and Mr. Ravich could not gain this investors confidence / support and shows cracks /opposition with in their own voting block which specks volumes to me about Mr. Ravich.
Respecting every shareholders right to vote their conscience, I don't criticize any. At the same time I will add my thoughts. In a very recent post it was said that " I struggled with my decision ", . I did also. At the same time I recognize that the struggle was not my choice, others were the cause of the struggle. For whatever reason it is hard for this company to be honest and transparent. The confusion continues. To me the board does not operate as a company should for a company that is about to grow at a tremendous speed. More, they are a rubber stamp, not much more. The board is supposed to be the managers boss. They set policy and give direction. They do not carry the day to day business of the company. They are the only ones that have the power to fire, or approve the hire of a new manager. When I get a letter from Rob telling me who to vote for to be his boss it bothers me a bit. When I read why I need to vote for his candidate because they will get us to CMS approval or negotiate or launch or market or manage or oversee, I have to ask myself is this a board member or a new employee. I was thinking most of these things the new board member will bring to the table were already done, I mean we are on the cusp aren't we? If TAO is imminent,it will happen with any new board or no board at all. Rob says that RB, if successful, will wage a war next year to take over the company. At the same time he says they don't own as many shares as they claim, maybe 1 %. That doesn't sound very threatening to me. If we are on the cusp and share price doubles or triples or more the cost to takeover becomes much harder. Cheap is vulnerable. RMTI could be on the cusp, there is a chance that we move from a small cap to a player in the big leagues. If that's the case my preference is to have a board that runs as a board should not a good old boy system that we now have. Domzalski doesn't impress me especially. Ravich doesn't really impress me either but for me it's a start. Rob has done a great job from start to now, but going forward I don't know. The past few years it seems that he has shut down the info flow to all and been successful in getting himself some healthy options. In my opinion we need a new board and possibly we need a new Chief. Nothing personal just good business. Good luck all
Voting blue because you don't like the way things have gone is just plain ignorant. If you want to vote blue because you think Ravich brings something to the table, then fine. The problem there is that he brings nothing beneficial to the table. Anyone not aware of what Ravich is attempting to do is not paying attention. His appointment to the board would be more harm than good. Your decisions are your own, but don't be stubborn and ignorant just because your investment didn't pay out as fast as you hoped. Greed causes a lot of bad decisions.
Lee, respectfully, directors disagree in board rooms every day. That's not necessarily a bad thing. Nothing wrong with different points of view. As for your rumors, they are what they are. Gl
instead of the barrage of insults, love to see management respond to the devastating glass lewis critique of their horrible performance as a board and management