While what you say is mostly correct, the last sentence is not if one of the management's errors is to deny there is manipulation. You yourself just referred to manipulation.
It has, I believe, generally been agreed to on this board that there has been manipulation in the price of this share. This manipulation, of course, is illegal but due to the failure of the regulators to regulate, this crime goes on unabated. Some posters have gone into this point in great detail. Therefore, the question follows logically, why does not the CEO see it?
Following on from there, if indeed there is manipulation and said CEO denys it, what would the average person/investor conclude?
So, you see, the share price in such circumstances would indeed be evidentiary and highly relevant in assessing that company's following through on its fiduciary responsibility to said shareholders, to wit, to take actions which would result in the share price going up and not down. When the down phase is all we have ever experienced for over two years, I think some questions should be asked.
