InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

hoffmann6383

07/14/22 10:21 AM

#494842 RE: Poor Man - #494841

Agree with all that. Disagreed with the prior incorrect interpretation.

Have a good one PM.
icon url

CrashOverride

07/14/22 10:22 AM

#494843 RE: Poor Man - #494841

Obviously they know that while I am sure they're being contacted by hundreds of shareholders daily on this issue. So why would they remain muzzled creating this conflict between management and shareholders unless for a compelling reason?
icon url

dennisdave

07/14/22 10:28 AM

#494849 RE: Poor Man - #494841

And the meeting must be held within 30 days after the designation, and that designation must be made within 13 months. Which has not been made.




the ultimo date the ASM had to be held is June 18th (May 18 2021 last year ASM +13 months after that)
icon url

biosectinvestor

07/14/22 10:32 AM

#494854 RE: Poor Man - #494841

Not really, read the whole section, those are the guidelines and a shareholder can hold them to them, though it probably would not be helpful, but the provision starts with basically it may not happen, but if it doesn’t basically, this is what and how…

It’s obviously preferred that it be in that time range, but the reality is it doesn’t affect the validity of corporate actions, and they may likely have a perfectly good reason for delay, they might even have a deal pending some series of events yet to unfold, so a shareholder forcing their hand early may just get a peremptory meeting that re-elects board members, and then will add to expenses later when they have to have another proxy or whatever they might need for an anticipated later event.

Regardless, it probably would not really have much impact for anyone to try to force it except that it adds expense.