I am a bit BEFUDDLED by this paragraph..

"Last, I don't believe giving out dividends will help the BOD, stay in power or raise their pay or keep the company going longer then 6 years after the patents expire, but a company treasury with 100 million or more in the bank will keep the stock price up and promote a merger with a growth company, that needs that money. Therefore, IMO, it is in the BOD's best interest not to give a dividends. The DOB will do whats in their best interest and by that time they will have millions of low priced options. IMO, no dividends"

Please parse this for me and relate the different thoughts that are expressed, in a more straightforward syntax, that I can understand..

Do you mean here that the BOD will not act in the S/H's best interests,and will NOT issue dividends In Your opinion?

Or are you saying that their/your preferred choice would/should be to accumulate cash to attract a suitor? In your opinion...

AND if they do that, and subsequently receive additional shares from their own/BOD issued options,how would that profit them, unless they sell those shares, or receive dividends?

Would the S/H's be voting on any takeover?

Would that violate the terms of the MA,or do you believe that the "NEW" recently altered agreement, (That has NOT been divulged to S/H's), would allow such a buyout?

"OR" is your post just a mishmash of convoluted/conflated irrelevance?