quote:Originally posted by TaxBack04: Chart ~ "-What don't you get?..."
I don't get how they are going to regulate the voting power.
I don't get how they are going to campaign for position with out providing real names.
I don't get how they are going to proove to shareholders thet their vote is going to count towards anything.
I don't get a good idea that they understand what it is they are creating.
I don't get how an unorganized shareholder comittee will help this company.
I don't get how a few feel they can speak for all when they talk nothing but cryptic hearsay all day with little or no fact to back it up.
and
I don't get why you are defending it.
If it is so critical to get it up now then "s c r e w" the non-proovable vote. Have Dogmando pick three names out of the hat, and make a real plan to fix the entire thing later.
"Because it was built broke." ~ TB (Quote me on that!)
quote:Originally posted by TaxBack04: Chart ~ "-What don't you get?..."
I don't get how they are going to regulate the voting power.
I don't get how they are going to campaign for position with out providing real names.
I don't get how they are going to proove to shareholders thet their vote is going to count towards anything.
I don't get a good idea that they understand what it is they are creating.
I don't get how an unorganized shareholder comittee will help this company.
I don't get how a few feel they can speak for all when they talk nothing but cryptic hearsay all day with little or no fact to back it up.
and
I don't get why you are defending it.
If it is so critical to get it up now then "s c r e w" the non-proovable vote. Have Dogmando pick three names out of the hat, and make a real plan to fix the entire thing later.
"Because it was built broke." ~ TB (Quote me on that!)
Great post!
Here's what I get...
"THEY" have our Money..." We have 7 days.
Peace ~
"I" want my money... 7 days is OK by me, as long as "THEY" don't get to keep it
I have to do it, only because I haven't seen the quote in a while:
CSHD TO DA MOON!
-------------------- Study before you buy, Sell before you think about it....
IP: Logged |
posted
I almost brought this up last night listening to Rufus, when he mentioned that three individuals needed to be elected. He also outlined the powers that shareholders in this three person committee would have. I knew that the voting for those three individuals would be an issue as soon as it was mentioned.
Go LISTEN to the interview last night. He clearly stated that the committee has NO MORE power than if an individual share holder called the company up and made a suggestion to Sabra, Mitch, Ben or Rufus himself. If the suggestion has merit, it will be discussed by the board. If it is something trivial or just downright ignorant, it will fall to the wayside. This sahreholder committee does not have any power to "force" the board into doing anything.
The ideas that Taxback outlined are the most logical and fair and definitly the most accurate way to go about having this committee setup. Something where votes are weighted by the number of shares you own, and ONLY current owners are allowed to vote. People should read what he had to say.
I don't know...at this point I'm glad I didn't send dogman my info because basically they would've been counting me for something I really didn't agree with.
Oh...and why on earth ANYONE, HSM'rs included, would vote for someone that didn't provide a resume with credentials and experience escapes me.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by glassman: TB04 is correct....
Agreed! The legitimacy of the process is very much in question; therefore, the legitimacy of the committee will also be in question. This would not be the ideal start for this committee!
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by CRab: I almost brought this up last night listening to Rufus, when he mentioned that three individuals needed to be elected. He also outlined the powers that shareholders in this three person committee would have. I knew that the voting for those three individuals would be an issue as soon as I heard that.
Go LISTEN to the interview last night. He clearly stated that the committee has NO MORE power than if an individual share holder called the company up and made a suggestion to Sabra, Mitch, Ben or Rufus himself. If the suggestion has merit, it will be discussed by the board. If it is something trivial or just downright ignorant, if will fall to the wayside.
The ideas that Taxback outlined are the most logical and fair and definitly the most accurate way to go about having this committee setup. Something where votes are weighted by the number of shares you own, and ONLY current owners are allowed to vote. People should read what he had to say.
I don't know...at this point I'm glad I didn't send dogman my info because basically they would've been counting me for something I really didn't agree with.
Oh...and why on earth ANYONE, HSM'rs included, would vote for someone that didn't provide a resume with credentials and experience escapes me.
Amen. You think like I do crab ~
Trouble is... If we build the "perfect race car" it will not be done in time for the race... -So why bother?
When "Time" is put in the equation, it's logic weakens. What good is that perfect shined up racecar if the race is over?...
quote:Originally posted by CRab: I almost brought this up last night listening to Rufus, when he mentioned that three individuals needed to be elected. He also outlined the powers that shareholders in this three person committee would have. I knew that the voting for those three individuals would be an issue as soon as I heard that.
Go LISTEN to the interview last night. He clearly stated that the committee has NO MORE power than if an individual share holder called the company up and made a suggestion to Sabra, Mitch, Ben or Rufus himself. If the suggestion has merit, it will be discussed by the board. If it is something trivial or just downright ignorant, if will fall to the wayside.
The ideas that Taxback outlined are the most logical and fair and definitly the most accurate way to go about having this committee setup. Something where votes are weighted by the number of shares you own, and ONLY current owners are allowed to vote. People should read what he had to say.
I don't know...at this point I'm glad I didn't send dogman my info because basically they would've been counting me for something I really didn't agree with.
Oh...and why on earth ANYONE, HSM'rs included, would vote for someone that didn't provide a resume with credentials and experience escapes me.
Amen. You think like I do crab ~
Trouble is... If we build the "perfect race car" it will not be done in time for the race... -So why bother?
When "Time" is put in the equation, it's logic weakens. What good is that perfect shined up racecar if the race is over?...
That is all I'm trying to say.
Ok then let anyone be a representative of the shareholders committee then.....regardless of who they are. Doesn't matter, right? I'm glad I didn't give my personal info out.
IP: Logged |
posted
I understand where you're coming from Chart, but I've never been one to rush something for the sake of saying looky here what I did. I think we differ in how we define "race". For you it is obvious the 7th is the end. For me, at least right now...I'm thinking of the race as something much more long term. I feel confident that CSHD will hire the necessary lawyers, advisors, whoever and take the necessary steps to make us all a whole lot of money. Us having a shareholder's committee is not something that will cure cancer or eliminate naked shorting. It will show that the shareholders believe in the company, and want to actively participate in the goings on...LONG TERM. A shareholder committee full of flippers, and swing traders is hardly what I envision as something useful. Taking this slow and doing it the right way...the first time...will prove to be far more useful in the end.
IP: Logged |
posted
I hear ya crab ~ Providing we get a positive outcome....
This is FAR from over, IMO pressure right now could divert "further" BS by the SEC, thereby giving us freedom for down the road. I still think we need to keep the horse in front of the cart, let's get over this hurdle first.
I don't think those boys are flippers, much like myself if this pans out I'll own that stock for many years to come!
posted
Sceptor/Phil said: "You folks are complaining that HSM is forming a committee yet doing nothing more than that. If you want representation and feel like you aren't getting it, form one. Just sitting around and finding ways to excuse your inactivity doesn't buy you anything but an excuse."
Shareholders committee? I was under the impression that this is what was being formed? I was also under the assumption that only one shareholder committee is "allowed"...per company...perhaps I am wrong...perhaps it is more "assumption" to say that "HSM, "Allstocks" "Ihub" or any other message board does not have the knowledge that is needed to simply jump in and make a bunch of "shareholders" committees.
I wish success to the "HSM committee"...I wish success to CSHD and I hope that all continue to do their part in bringing "concerns" to the appropriate people.
New2? Stir Fry for dinner?
-------------------- #1 Rule: Protect your capital! #2 Rule: Never fall for the BS on the boards!
IP: Logged |
posted
Sorry, I'm not interested in joining a HSM comittee. I'm on Allstocks. If it was connected to the cvsu.us website or say even a link on their website I may be more inclined to sign up.
IP: Logged |
posted
It's funny Yahoo can't decide whether the symbol is CSHD.OB or CSHD.PK. It's been flip-flopping the Headlines back and forth all day.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Fredgrasshopper: After all thats going on and we still close even for the day. A sign of strength. IMHO
Not funny, that was just not even funny....
No, not funny...but true none the less. Hey at least it's not going down.
That is very true, but I think saying it is a sign of strength is quite a stretch considering we are not trading. Sign of strength that is has so many shareholders behind it perhaps....
-------------------- Study before you buy, Sell before you think about it....
IP: Logged |
posted
a lot of us post on both boards so lets make sure chart and st. matt get on the committee over on hsm. do we vote our shares like a proxy on the commitee or is it one vote per person?
-------------------- I'm from Missouri - Show Me!
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Chartwalker: I hear ya crab ~ Providing we get a positive outcome....
This is FAR from over, IMO pressure right now could divert "further" BS by the SEC, thereby giving us freedom for down the road. I still think we need to keep the horse in front of the cart, let's get over this hurdle first.
I don't think those boys are flippers, much like myself if this pans out I'll own that stock for many years to come!
Looking forward to MANY forward slits!
-and I wish everyone, all the best
Once again I think they have done a good job of showing shareholder unity to date. 15M in 600 some odd share holders in just a few days. (Not to sound like the Guiness Guys.) Brilliant!
But honestly get it set-up choose the three leaders. Show the strength in 7 days, and then get ready to build it right.
Currently, the way it is planned it is not going to last with out an enormous amount of foot work required by the leadership. I am not interested in setting up a permanent system for a company in CSHD's situation. It is too time consuming to get it thrown together and then disolved because of a botched defense. This one by Dogmando is perfect for the use at hand. Pick three people and go with it.
I just want my "FU" money, and when I have it and more I will easily quit the day job and build it probono. Of course while trading my new wealth, and holding CSHD for the long haul.
quote:Originally posted by CRab: I understand where you're coming from Chart, but I've never been one to rush something for the sake of saying looky here what I did. I think we differ in how we define "race". For you it is obvious the 7th is the end. For me, at least right now...I'm thinking of the race as something much more long term. I feel confident that CSHD will hire the necessary lawyers, advisors, whoever and take the necessary steps to make us all a whole lot of money. Us having a shareholder's committee is not something that will cure cancer or eliminate naked shorting. It will show that the shareholders believe in the company, and want to actively participate in the goings on...LONG TERM. A shareholder committee full of flippers, and swing traders is hardly what I envision as something useful. Taking this slow and doing it the right way...the first time...will prove to be far more useful in the end.
At last a voice of reason here (but not the only one). The idea of a shareholder committee was first put forth so us shareholders could show support for Rufus to the SEC in his time of need.
Later, the web site can be made so verification and solidarity can be established among all shareholders no matter what board peeps post on. Nominations can be made at that time with info posted as to their qualifications, then we can go to a vote. These things take time. I see no need for all this squabbling and being so defensive about the different boards. People need to grow up here.
Topic Closed
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
I have to do it, only because I haven't seen the quote in a while:![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
