Let's break this down a bit.....what it is you are asking...

1) management that is professional

2) management that is competent

3) management that follows rules of corporate governence

4) management that communicates with its' shareholders

5) management that is responsible to its' shareholders

6) management that can mount a creidible PR effort

7) management that has serious brokerage house support

8) management that has a game plan for increasing shareholder value

This is the thing.....how do you measure the above? They all involve a certain level of judgement....or relativity....and opinions.

For instance...one may say Granger is more competent than Peter...what is the basis for that argument? They both have completely different backgrounds and strengths. How much weight do you allocate to each given the nature of the business?

Your point with regards to communicating and being responsible to the shareholders....should management be expected to take all your calls and to answer all your questions....to your satisfaction. What is even appropriate...should communication be to all shareholders at the same time through news releases?

With respect to management's game plan....we all have ideas of what that game plan should be....different time horizons. Perhaps in times like these, the best plan is to lay low and cut expenses until such time that the market recovers...where one could realize better value for thier resources...where money could be raised at higher prices.

Could we assume that if the share price rises...reaches all time highs...that all of the above must be true of management. Was Peter more competent when NOT first hit in the ring of fire; causing FNC's share price to balloon? Nobody was compaining then.

Because you can not measure the above, we could argue forever about what Peter brings in relation to each one of those points....and also what Granger had to offer.

You go on about a proxy battle brewing for next year....like it's a forgone conclusion. Do you even think Granger would be up for another round next year....or is the plan to bring in another...like Teleprobe for instance....seems like you would vote your grandmother, rather than Peter.

You guys go off making general comments about Peter...very little which is based on fact...or something one can measure.....more to do with your opinions.....and that's fine....nobody is saying you are not entitled to your opinions. It's just when you present those opinions as fact.

Yes...it is a fact that those are qualities we all look for in a leader. However, we all use a different yardstick when it comes to measuring those qualities. And for some.....it is more than just the current share price....or whether management returns our personal calls...or answers all our questions to our satisfaction.