Friday, June 20, 2008 11:01:07 AM
DEFENSES AGAINST HOSTILE TAKEOVERS
While the following discussion summarizes the reasons for, and the operation and effects of, certain provisions of the Amendments and Bylaws which management has identified as potentially having an anti-takeover effect, it is not intended to be a complete description of all potential anti-takeover effects, and it is qualified in its entirety by reference to the Amendments and Bylaws, copies of which are attached to this Information Statement.
The anti-takeover provisions in Nevada law, the Amendments and Bylaws are designed to minimize our susceptibility to sudden acquisitions of control which have not been negotiated with and approved by our board of directors. These provisions may tend to make it more difficult to remove the incumbent members of the board of directors and may have the effect of preventing an acquisition or tender offer which might be viewed by stockholders to be in their best interests.
Page 6
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tender offers or other non-open market acquisitions of stock are usually made at prices above the prevailing market price of a company’s stock. In addition, acquisitions of stock by persons attempting to acquire control through market purchases may cause the market price of the stock to reach levels which are higher than would otherwise be the case. Anti-takeover provisions may discourage such purchases, particularly those of less than all of the company’s stock, and may thereby deprive stockholders of an opportunity to sell their stock at a temporarily higher price. These provisions may therefore decrease the likelihood that a tender offer will be made, and, if made, will be successful. As a result, the provisions may adversely affect those stockholders who would desire to participate in a tender offer. These provisions may also serve to insulate incumbent management from change and to discourage not only sudden or hostile takeover attempts, but any attempts to acquire control which are not approved by the board of directors, whether or not stockholders deem such transactions to be in their best interests.
While the following discussion summarizes the reasons for, and the operation and effects of, certain provisions of the Amendments and Bylaws which management has identified as potentially having an anti-takeover effect, it is not intended to be a complete description of all potential anti-takeover effects, and it is qualified in its entirety by reference to the Amendments and Bylaws, copies of which are attached to this Information Statement.
The anti-takeover provisions in Nevada law, the Amendments and Bylaws are designed to minimize our susceptibility to sudden acquisitions of control which have not been negotiated with and approved by our board of directors. These provisions may tend to make it more difficult to remove the incumbent members of the board of directors and may have the effect of preventing an acquisition or tender offer which might be viewed by stockholders to be in their best interests.
Page 6
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tender offers or other non-open market acquisitions of stock are usually made at prices above the prevailing market price of a company’s stock. In addition, acquisitions of stock by persons attempting to acquire control through market purchases may cause the market price of the stock to reach levels which are higher than would otherwise be the case. Anti-takeover provisions may discourage such purchases, particularly those of less than all of the company’s stock, and may thereby deprive stockholders of an opportunity to sell their stock at a temporarily higher price. These provisions may therefore decrease the likelihood that a tender offer will be made, and, if made, will be successful. As a result, the provisions may adversely affect those stockholders who would desire to participate in a tender offer. These provisions may also serve to insulate incumbent management from change and to discourage not only sudden or hostile takeover attempts, but any attempts to acquire control which are not approved by the board of directors, whether or not stockholders deem such transactions to be in their best interests.


