NeoMedia Technologies, Inc (NEOM)

[clawmann]

Jonsie:

read this post I just made:
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=39468776

The proxy materials for the 2006 ASM say that the shareholders held a total of 766,129,260 votes, including 133,822,363 votes to which Cornell Capital was entitled."

So I don't know where Womble got his 632,306,843 number unless he backed out the Cornell and the insider votes, and found that, of the remaining votes, 58% of the retail shares were voted in favor.

That would, I think explain Scott's numbers, they were limited to the retail shareholders.

And if you subtract 366,948,797 (Scott's "for" number) from 567,687,092 (the "for" number in the Q), I think the difference equals the Cornell votes plus the votes of insiders. About 200 million.

But thanks much for that. It supports the argument that Cornell did in fact vote in excess of 10%.


Hard to believe that only 49 million shares were voted against and 1.6 million abstained. That is only 50.6 million that did not vote in favor. And that is not 42% of any number that makes sense.

Is the Q wrong? Or was Scott wrong?

IF only 49 million shares were voted against, then quite a few of our board members who said they were voting "no" were not being truthful. Do we have our own "Robert the Bruce" (as he was portrayed in the movie Braveheart).