Questions from Shareholders that require REAL Answers from the Estonian House Board
Kommentaarid on kirjutatud EWR lugejate poolt. Nende sisu ei pruugi ühtida EWR toimetuse seisukohtadega.
aktsionar22 Sep 2015 21:53
jah, head küsimused, eks neid tuleb koosolekul arutada. Aga üldiselt on nendele küsimused kerged vastused. See on suur projekt, seda viiakse läbi vabatahtliku juhatuse poolt, mina küll ei näe midagi viga väikeses kompensatsioonis. See raha on nii väike üldises skeemis. Ja konsultantide peale tuleb ka sellise suure projekti puhul raha kulutada, muidu jälle virisetakse, et otsused on tehtud uisapõisa ilma prof nõuandeta.

Board minutes on väga harva saadaval osanikele, mina ei tea ühtegi organisatsiooni kes neid avaldaks, jne, jne.
Duped?23 Sep 2015 06:17
Compensation for board members who have bungled three proposals, burned through three identical $100k studies, bankrupted the house and haven't been able to get anything done for 7 years? In the real world, harsh accountability would be demanded In the face of such stunning incompetence: not a pat on the head and an envelope full of cash.
shareholder (multiple shares)23 Sep 2015 09:05
Not surprised at all at the questionable-value decisions made by the Board in recent years. Even though it has a group of "highly educated" - but short of practical experience - eager-beavers as decision-makers. Typically, such Boards will - sooner or later - bring the enterprise they manage to its knees. So, the end of Toronto Esto-house is very near!!!
Who is the author?23 Sep 2015 14:47
Why doesn't the self-declared expert who wrote this article identify himself and show his qualifications?
shareholder (multiple shares)23 Sep 2015 17:12
... all shareholders have equal rights!

Incidentally, the EWR kwows my identity - what's yours?
Samalt IP numbrilt on siin varem kommenteerinud: shareholder (multiple shares) (09:05)
Representing many23 Sep 2015 17:51
Self-declared expert? I didn't read anything about being an expert. The comments are simply from a concerned shareholder.
Samalt IP numbrilt on siin varem kommenteerinud: Representing many (17:49)
Representing many23 Sep 2015 17:49
I applaud the author - names are not as important as the ideas that are presented.

In the business world, these directors would have been fired long ago. Total incompetence.

As to the need for secrecy - that's simple to explain. If you discuss options and plans, you'll get objections - and this Board does not want objections.

We are not oblivious to the winks, smiles and nods that the Board members give each other during presentations. "Here's so and so again, you deal with it this time."

I hope we get answers tomorrow - REAL answers, but I doubt it.
This is a serious matter!23 Sep 2015 20:07
There are two sides to every story; and the truth generally lies somewhere else.

In this instance, we have some ugly allegations suggesting that the Board lacks integrity. The anonymous author should step out, into the light of day and phrase the charges specifically.

Also, the Board should compose a rebuttal.
mandariin23 Sep 2015 21:56
This board has a complete mandate to govern the business of the corporation until such time as it is replaced or recalled by the shareholders. The author of this article and her supporters amongst the EWR troll community have no. Mandate other than their personal conceits.
The Board better beware!24 Sep 2015 08:12
After Ehatare's Board dismissed an employee, a harridan with no connection to Ehatare organized a campaign of behind-the-scenes vengeance that terrorized Ehatare for a couple of years. All the while, the Board cowered in silence.

The eventual out-of-court settlement included a confidentiality clause. Now, the Board looks like it's guilty of something, but; we know not what.

Something similar is surfacing at Eesti Maja. As its Board works for feasible solutions, it's being terrorized by anonymous forces claiming to represent a broader community and a higher law.

If they were shareholders, they'd have the right to be heard.
Just curious.24 Sep 2015 16:27
Wasn't the consultant supposed to qualify and assess the developers who participated in the open and transparent RFQ and RFP process?
Yet Tribute was brought to the table at the last minuet by a former EH Board member.
Now a new developer is at the table with a new LOI in record time. What happened to due process?
And what value did EH and the shareholders get from the consultant?
Kommentaarid sellele artiklile on suletud.
Feb 25 2018 - igas kodus
Kooslaulmine EV100
Feb 25 2018 - Üle ilma Eesti kodudes
Kooslaulmine EV100
Mar 14 2018 - Toronto Eesti Maja
Eesti Keskuse projekti koosolek

Vaata veel ...

Lisa uus sündmus