After years of earning £170,000 as a reward for being a total disaster as CEO of Pathfinder Minerals (PFP), the new board has taken just ten days to part company with Nick “not for the many but for the Trew” but massive questions remain.
We have news today that Pathfinder Minerals (PFP) has a new Nomad and broker in Strand Hanson and two new directors in Simon Farrell and Scott Richardson Brown. The former becomes non exec chairman replacing disgraced Nick not for the many but for the Trew but, Trew remains on the board. This is not good enough. It is time to drain the swamp. And it can be done at once. Here's why.
Nick Trew, the CEO of Pathfinder Minerals (PFP) is currently attempting to fight off an EGM request to oust him and Toff Tory MP Sir Henry Bellingham of 3DM infamy from the board. Their record of non delivery should be enough to see them sent packing but another allegation has now been made which - if proven - would make their dismissal a black and white issue. Nomad WH Ireland and AIM Regulation must investigate this at once.
As Richard Jennings at Align prepares to respond to the woeful EGM defence of Pathfinder Minerals (PFP) incumbents serial trougher Sir Henry Bellingham MP of 3DM infamy and Nick "Not for the many but for the" Trew, a new player has emerged.
I do not always agree with Richard Jennings of Align Research. In fact he can be 100% wrong on certain matters. But on Pathfinder Minerals (PFP) he is bang on the money in trying to oust its useless board. In that battle he has today writting to NED Sir Henry Bellend MP of 3DM infamy. Over to Jennings who flags up a new dirty track Bellend and £170,000 a year CEO Nick "Not for the Many but for the " Trew are trying to play::
Mr Bellingham
As you know I disagree strongly on a number of matters with Richard Jennings of Align Research but on the matter of Pathfinder Minerals (PFP) he is 100% right to want to oust the current management who are overpaid, inept and now acting in a way that puts their own interests ahead of those of the company. They are frequently accused of misleading investors. So we back Jennings in this case. He has written an open letter to his fellow shareholders which is hard hitting and raises very valid points. Over to Jennings.
