Why are they spending gobs of money on expensive talent like Jeff Hardy, Rob Van Dam, Hulk Hogan, and Eric Bischoff when using less expensive former WWE talent and home grown stars brought in the same ratings and better PPV buyrates (though the declining buyrates are more creatives fault than the wrestlers). Without the expensive names the company was at one point actually turning a profit as opposed to losing money like they have since Hogan and company joined.
To start with, we have NO idea when or if TNA ever lost or made money as a company. We heard rumors a couple of years ago, but nothing was confirmed. It would be counterproductive for them to give out that information.
What a stockholder WOULD ask is this: Where is the company in relation to the plan you set out for it last year? If it's not there, why not? What is your plan for the company for the coming year?
There would be no need to ask about the finances because that would be in the actual report to the Board. You'd have those figures in front of you.
Then, if you are not satisfied with Dixie's answers, you can move that she not be retained as CEO, and the Board would vote on it.
In reality it doesn't work that way since Dixie effectively owns the company as well as acting as CEO. That's the big advantage of keeping a company private-you maintain control. When a company goes public, the original owners can make LOTS of money, but they cease to be completely in charge from that point on.
"I'll go through Handsome Jimmy like Ex-Lax through a widow woman." -Jerry "The King" Lawler