06-07-2016, 05:17 AM
Making sense goes both ways: Phil is requesting that any deals involving 10% or more of assets go to shareholders for approval. Did he operate that way in any of his deals he worked on? Does that make sense. He also takes claim for the $105 pps (as brief as it was and it never closed there I don't believe) which occurred after he had "retired" as CEO and only remained as a lame duck director on a BOD which helped him "retire". Does that make sense?

