Santa,

What it comes down to, literally, is that the shareholders OWN the company and the ceo is supposed to run the company IN THEIR BEST INTEREST and the interest of the company.

You can defend defend defend management with your devil's advocate point of view all you want. Try defending the lack of openness (vague and/ or untimely drill results and press releases, disappearing information from SLI website, no return calls or emails from management, bold faced lies about pp, etc) the huge expenses incured by management for management, the decisions affecting SLI in a seemingly negative way (sale of properties, lack of renewal of properties, strange investment tactics ie: fashion shows?) and the obvious desire for change (green voting numbers at the last AGM!)

If you can logicaly explain how these acts or non acts show management has made choices for the best interest of this company and its OWNERS I would greatly appreciate it as would a lot of shareholders and posters on this board

Thank you ma'am

0zzyfan