14. Mr. Klingle deliberately, viciously created Class A and Class B shares by hiring high-profile attorneys. He controls 67.4% of the company’s stock. In reality, he has 100% control of the company. Therefore, the shareholders have no say so, which gives him the legal right to drain the company. This is grossly inappropriate and morally wrong. He is literally milking the company’s assess for his own benefit.
15. On April 30, 2009, I attended the annual shareholders’ meeting. Once again, I was the only “outsider” that was there. I asked Mr. Klingle what plans he has to improve the value of AWX. He stated, “We will continue to make good business decisions.” At which I replied, “There’s been no improvements for the past two decades, what good business decisions have you made?” Mr. Klingle told me that this kind of question is better asked in a different format. I also told Mr. Klingle that he is lavishly spending money and mismanaging the company. Mr. Klingle replied that, as a shareholder, I have no say on how to run the company.
16. The Class A Directors should be aware that if they grossly neglect their fiduciary responsibility, I plan on bringing a lawsuit against the company. They cannot become puppets of Mr. Klingle and should not say ‘yes’ to him when he is grossly, inappropriately, irrationally, and lavishly investing in golf club renovations in very economically depressed areas. The population of the Youngstown area has gone down from 178,000 to 70,000 over the years.
17. Mr. Klingle is deliberately destroying the shareholders value. He is financially torturing the shareholders.
18. I think it is grossly unfair that Mr. Klingle, without any significant cash value or improvement of the shareholders’ value, is authorizing 1.3 million new shares. He is grossly, inappropriately managing the company. So far, he has done nothing in 11 years. Why does he want to re-issue 1.3 million new shares now?
19. The prospects of issuing options at a huge discount to book value is unfair and dilutive to bonafide shareholders, particularly since it has been there for 11 years and it has failed to grow the value of the company or the share price. To reward the performance with options at a very low price is objectionable.