InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

excel

08/09/03 7:06 PM

#14856 RE: austin01 #14855

Austin. I knew the authorization was coming for more shares.
In what form, or how many though I didn't know, as I discussed the fact we'd only have so many options with Ketch a few months ago.

He agreed they would have to do one of the options we discussed.

What I wasn't aware of they'd end up asking for that much.

The respectful way to do this would be to ask for 160 million.

With the 240 million to only be able to be used for collateral on future loans.
Or aquistions approved by the shareholders which makes financial sense to our investment return.

Not furture salaries.

That would give us shareholders some what of a saftey net knowing at least for the time being dilution would be limited to the 160 million as it occurs.

At least give us something!

We've certainly are being asked a lot here not to be given at least the above!



icon url

jeff_p

08/09/03 7:25 PM

#14857 RE: austin01 #14855

austin, there is no way it can be voted down. If every poster that has ever posted on Rb and IHUB and all their relatives voted NO, it would still pass. Shoot, Ray alone could probably out vote the entire posting population. The vote is a mere formality. ...And, i totally agree with greg, we should be guaranteed that the extra 240mil shares can only be used as collateral...anything else is shady and pompous.
jp