>You are glossing over the fact that the current board of directors are not the same people who got the company into trouble in 2008. That doesn't bear on whet

>You are glossing over the fact that the current board of directors are not the same people who got the company into trouble in 2008. That doesn't bear on whether they could (jokingly obv.) claim to be an unsophisticated victim of predatory lending, only the board at the time matters for that. The board can run the company the way they want, barring gross misconduct or fraud, the shareholders had their say at the AGM.