That reference caused a shudder @Bushmanpat- and I wasn't an RFT holder, but it was a terrible example of poor corporate governance as well as zero regard for ordinary retail shareholders. Apart from the market cap difference you mention - and that is certainly a BIG difference - the market seemed to like today's moves by Mr White and associates, with the WTC SP closing up +2% instead of dropping, so that's one difference. Another is that I doubt that WTC's SP is going to fall 90% from its highs over this, whereas RFT closed today at $0.006, so less than one cent per share, in fact six tenths of one cent per share, 90% lower than their close of $0.06 (six cents per share) on June 8th 2023.

But I agree with your basic point, that this is all about the largest shareholders flexing their muscles and taking back control, ensuring that Richard White stays front and centre running the company, because they can, not because it's the "right" thing to do. And that was the motivation at RFT, with the largest shareholder and his associates wanting to oust everybody who might prove to be a fly in the ointment in terms of ownership percentage and control, in order to lock in full control, ensuring that they were left with a compliant Board that would go along with the largest shareholder's wishes and demands from that point on.

I think the biggest difference, other than the two companies' respective market caps, is that the WiseTech saga is unlikely to do as much damage to ordinary retail shareholders in terms of value destruction.

Interesting also to note that there hasn't been a single announcement by RFT since the Annual Report announcements in September, except for announcements relating directly to the AGM that were made in October and November. Not one word from RFT in December, January or February - yet - they do have two days left to report their results. I'm thinking that communicating with their ordinary retail investors isn't high on their priorities list. Either that or it's been a really boring 3 months with nothing noteworthy happening.

Disc: Not holding (either of them).

For me, this is all very simple. RW has the votes, so he can remove any Director he doesn't agree with or like. Christine Holman who seems a very capable and smart Director resigned a few years ago from his Board citing poor governance etc.

If this was a private company, he would be free to do as he pleases. However there are certain obligations of public companies, like having an audit and risk committee that has a majority of independent Directors, which WTC no longer complies with and the ASX/ASIC will now need to deal with. And being public is one of the key reasons WTC is on such a high multiple and why RW can keep selling down his shareholding easily.

At the end of the day, RW has clearly told all the other owners what he thinks - "I am WTC. There is no WTC without me."

So while he is very important to WTC, he is 69 years old and there will 100% be a WTC without him one day unless he has invented the fountain of youth (or it goes broke first).

The company could still do well from here but no one should say they weren't warned or aware of this big risk now, with a Founder displaying significant hubris and who appears to have little interest in sensible oversight or succession planning...

Bottom line - good results are still possible from here but with 30 000 + other public companies in major markets to potentially invest in, I don't need a company like WTC that has so much known risk in my portfolio.