posted
Can someone PM Simon and ask him to tell Rufus to answer the questions instead of asking us questions and riddles? We are not responsible for the answers...he is.
Can someone ask Simon to tell Rufus that he is sinking his own ship and he is taking us down with him...those who have stood behind him through thick and thin up to now.
Gotta tell you...I don't like him anymore...I was wrong about him. His only excuse here would be that he is drunk on his B-Day and he is a mean drunk. Either way, that is not CEO material.
Let's move on...legal or not...leave John Arlitt in place or we are possibly done!
-------------------- "If you go the Extra Mile there will be no Traffic Jams".
posted
I think I would be able to following the conversation better if Simon was as “hammered” as Rufus. At least they would be “thinking” and slurring at the same speed.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by CRab: That is the only thing I'm not understanding right now. I mean, I'm the type of person to ask questions and then ask more if I'm not understanding. At this point...the only thing I want to know is what the SEC considers "proof", and how can we get said "proof" to them.
I haven't heard/seen/read one person actually even attempt to answer this...I mean when you break all this down is this not the ONLY thing that matters at this point?
quote:Originally posted by St. Matthew: Can someone PM Simon and ask him to tell Rufus to answer the questions instead of asking us questions and riddles? We are not responsible for the answers...he is.
Can someone ask Simon to tell Rufus that he is sinking his own ship and he is taking us down with him...we who have stood behind him through thick and thin up to now.
Gotta tell you...I don't like him anymore...I was wrong about him. His only excuse here would be that he is drunk on his B-Day and he is a mean drunk. Either way, that is not CEO material.
Let's move on...legal or not...leave John Arlitt in place or we are possibly done!
too funny...
"I don't like him anymore."
"I was wrong about him."
Jello shot?
-------------------- Nashoba Holba Chepulechi Adventures in microcapitalism...
IP: Logged |
posted
Believe it or not...that was intentional...
Jello shot?
quote:Originally posted by T e x:
quote:Originally posted by St. Matthew: Can someone PM Simon and ask him to tell Rufus to answer the questions instead of asking us questions and riddles? We are not responsible for the answers...he is.
Can someone ask Simon to tell Rufus that he is sinking his own ship and he is taking us down with him...we who have stood behind him through thick and thin up to now.
Gotta tell you...I don't like him anymore...I was wrong about him. His only excuse here would be that he is drunk on his B-Day and he is a mean drunk. Either way, that is not CEO material.
Let's move on...legal or not...leave John Arlitt in place or we are possibly done!
too funny...
"I don't like him anymore."
"I was wrong about him."
Jello shot?
-------------------- "If you go the Extra Mile there will be no Traffic Jams".
quote:Originally posted by CRab: That is the only thing I'm not understanding right now. I mean, I'm the type of person to ask questions and then ask more if I'm not understanding. At this point...the only thing I want to know is what the SEC considers "proof", and how can we get said "proof" to them.
I haven't heard/seen/read one person actually even attempt to answer this...I mean when you break all this down is this not the ONLY thing that matters at this point?
posted
Was Rufus just saying that the company can't afford a lawyer?... so John must be paying for it himself?... or was he hinting that John doesn't have the access to the company's money?
-------------------- ..just remember....Family is EVERYTHING!!
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Jenna: Was Rufus just saying that the company can't afford a lawyer?... so John must be paying for it himself?... or was he hinting that John doesn't have the access to it?
-------------------- #1 Rule: Protect your capital! #2 Rule: Never fall for the BS on the boards!
IP: Logged |
Where would the price of silver be if 4 traders were not net short 86% of the total commercial net short position, or 175 million ounces of a total 203.5 million ounces?
posted
This is crazy... John took over the company because he did not want to wait anymore. But by not waiting he did not do it legally. Rufas was actually trying to help him take over the company legally by calling a shareholders meeting and paying for the proxy mailings. Now John has hired an attourney and Rufas says he will support him since he got an 8K out by some miracle. But hand holding support will cost him 500K in compensation for him and another 500K for Ben. (Appearantly it will take both to run the original business model) Rufas could not hire an attourney because the company was cash poor as suspected. Did not hire an attourney because he was under the impression that nothing was happening till January and it was not his highest priority.
posted
Somebody who has access to John... get him a message to publically cancel the Shareholder Meeting please... Otherwise they are going to get us forced into recievership due to the lack of Proxy notification 10 days prior to the meeting.
quote:Originally posted by TaxBack04: Somebody who has access to John... get him a message to publically cancel the Shareholder Meeting please... Otherwise they are going to get us forced into recievership due to the lack of Proxy notification 10 days prior to the meeting.
sound the alarms wooooooooooooooooooooOOoooWWWWWWWOOOOOOoooooooWWWoooooo
IP: Logged |
posted
I'm convinced Rufus still is the key to the success of this company. How will Arlitt have the same connections to hypothecate the bonds? Sure, it's great to have a law firm, but what's the use if we can't do anything with the bonds?
None of us real shareholders (or only a select few) really know exactly what's going on. After this latest SPR talk, some see Rufus as an angry drunk...I see it as somebody who's been slapped in the face and is trying to protect his creation. Remember, he's a large shareholder and has worked on this a long time. Does he want this to fail? No. Does he have the connections to hypothecate the bonds and also to fund the JV's? Yes. Does Arlitt? Maybe.
I'm hoping all will work it's way out, but the Euroclear account will go a long way to validating everything. I think the 'shareholder's committee' jumped the gun by throwing out Rufus. Maybe not. One thing's for sure, this has totally split the investor base. We'll see what happens. My guess is that Rufus will return in some form as part of the company, when it's more apparent that he's needed.
Bottom line: Who got the bonds for the company? Who's responsible for this company? Why would he want to destroy the company? He doesn't. Why distrust him after all he's done? Please check Euroclear again. Finally, Rufus is a shareholder, just like us. He wants this to succeed. He created it.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Jenna: Was Rufus just saying that the company can't afford a lawyer?... so John must be paying for it himself?... or was he hinting that John doesn't have the access to the company's money?
could be either...
1) company may not have much cash--from what I've seen posted? this could easily be true
2) the "new CEO" may not know which drawers hide the forks--which is common enough in corporate dealings. Given the in's n' outs of late, we may have true bickering, here.
3) *Could be* all smokescreen: ie, the FHAL debt is gone, principals walked with some good dough, so they throw smoke-grenades their wake...
-------------------- Nashoba Holba Chepulechi Adventures in microcapitalism...
IP: Logged |
posted
Tex ~ don't forget the fact that if they are cash poor, most companys like to trade shares for services... and I doubt the lawfirms were very receptive to this deal when they are this close to recievership.