Replies to post #98138 on Quantum Materials Corp. (fka QTMM)

[TedJ]

I will point out that the current situation is not really a sale of the company's property or assets. Pasaca will not own any assets such they can walk away with the asset or use it for their own purposes, they will just own 51% of the common stock, which gives them control of the voting but their other rights are the same as the other shareholders.

Another point, if QMC fails to uphold the parts of the agreements and/or defaults, then Pasaca could end up owning certain assets or property outright, as described in the agreements.

[QuantumTravesty]

Thanks Ted but I’m not exactly sure what’s your ruling on this lol. From the 14c you provided they took the same action that I’m guessing they could do again now without asking retail holders for their vote.
From 14c
WE ARE NOT ASKING YOU FOR A PROXY, AND YOU ARE REQUESTED NOT TO SEND US A PROXY.

In your opening you said they need a proxy but provided the 51% written consent clause that gets around putting things to a full vote of all shareholders. Unless the written 51% is the proxy IDK and am not that smart.
I just started this to do the math and open the conversation up to the fact they could do again what you’ve dug up from 2010 regarding decisions that could be made that current shareholders think they will have a voice in without them. I said I’d seen it before and you’ve reminded me where one of the instances was.