......................
CWI do you have a business plan that was presented to the Board of directors at least 5 years ago, and reviewed yearly at annual meetings?
Did no one see the shortfall in revenues vs expenses?
Then why have a board of directors?
The directors are the ones that approves and directs the CEO plans , it shows where their are downfalls in revenue versus expenses. Such are shown, a couple of years in advance.
It then allows management to take corrective actions.
The Board would direct the CEO on what actions must be taken to be solvent.
Most likely Banks in the region have looked at the clueless bunch at CWI and ran for the hills.
You have gone to the ICC on a few occasions for bail out funds. Doesn't that not say something?
Are your directors still flying first class...I have seen some on such trips.
It tells that no one in this group is familiar with financing and did due diligence.
Ken Gordon decades ago put CWI/WICB in the black and left a plan... it was never followed.
How did these individuals get such job opportunities ; I see why diamonds in the rough players are turned into charcoal, owing to the fact that charcoal acumen resides at the Board level.
When I nominate a Board member they bring certain asset to my board of directors, they are not there as an old boys club.
I do a dozen plus times the revenue collect by CWI and I have only 6 directors on my board.
Studies show that large boards severely compromise organizational agility, individual accountability, and overall governance efficiency. It shows that decision-making effectiveness drops by roughly 10% for every member added beyond seven. Strategies are often heavily compromised and lose their strategic edge. Large groups naturally fracture ending up with 7 to 9 dominant members.
Think of the CEO , the amount of time it takes to contact a large board and developing relationships.
Why bother to proceed......they are like T&T bankrupt.
Sarge .. sigh
