Well, in final analysis, I think you have missed my main point. My argument isn't with your conclusions. It's that you present a fact pattern leading you to these conclusions that you then present as fact and malign management in a significant way as a result. It's the strength of your response base on, by your own admission, inferred information that I have issue with.
And I'm glad you brought up my point in the second paragraph. I was wondering whether you'd respond as you did. With this in mind, I specifically qualified the conclusion as "I'm not saying this is what happen" just that it was more likely. In other words, I was trying to subtly give an example of making an argument while recognizing that, with incomplete information, it might not be the case.