I had a sour taste in my mouth about this board ever since the AGM. At that meeting I raised the point that none of the new members of the board held one single share of NOT. I did not think that was right. If an individual is appointed to the Board, they should at least express their support for the company by holding a token shareholding. In any case, my question was taken by Perisotto but not answered. I wished I would have been more aggressive in getting an answer.

I have an unfavorable opinion of this board mostly because I feel the whole Rosseau caper smelled of greed - ie these guys saw a good thing here and wanted to get in on it because they could see a big payoff for them. Right or wrong that is the way I feel.

I would be happy to have a new board. But we haven't the resources to remove them and appoint a whole slate.

BUT - why can't we try to nominate and appoint one or two new members who are more friendly to the retail investors. When the AGM comes up we all get a proxy form asking to vote for the retention of the members of the board. But why can't we nominate one or two NEW members. This person (s) would be capable, not considered too threatening by the rest of the board ( although this idea may be impossible), and may be supported by some institutions.

I would love to see Richard there but he would be too toxic to the rest of the board. But why not someone involved in the other RoF companies? Who ? I don't know. Just musing right now.

But I think if we could focus on one or two individuals to be candidates that should be doable.