UNIQUE BROADBAND SYSTEMS (UBS:VSE) Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : UNIQUE BROADBAND SYSTEMS (UBS:VSE)

UBS 42.69

-1.2%

Dec 15 4:00 PM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: timester who wrote (670)	11/9/2000 11:01:19 AM
From: timester	Read Replies (1) of 682

Analysis on the Sun article After coming home and briefly reviewing most of the posts on the message boards today I have noticed that no one has actually talked about the issues in the Baines article. A lot of yelling and shouting. I don't think many people actually understand the issues at all. We should all know that Baines does this sort of articles all the time. He did one on UBS last January. He lives for this stuff and loves the attention. His timing before the AGM to rehash things from years ago is suspicious. This article is definitely slanted. Anyways let's dissect the key points of the article: "In another case, the insider -- director Paul MacNeill, a Vancouver securities lawyer with Campney & Murphy -- sold $4.7 million worth of stock while negotiations for the pricing of a private share offering were still in progress." Old news. No Security Regulations violated. Insider Reports were filed. "Others closely associated with the company and its principals -- including Dolgonos' wife, mother and father -- have been placed on the company's payroll and granted generous stock options. " This is definitely warrants the 'innuendo' claim by UBS. Baines makes it sound like the employees were mysteriously placed on the payroll. Fact is they have been with the company from the beginning (10 years) and have/do held prominent positions with the company. Father is a Director. Mother is a manager. Wife is an accountant and Office Manager. The stock options have all been properly reported and were equal to the share price of UBS at the time of their granting. No Security Regulation Violations. All info has been available in fillings for years and properly filed. "Dolgonos' wife, Tina Livchits, received options to buy several hundred thousand shares in March even though she had received a kidney transplant several weeks earlier and had been placed on extended sick leave." UBS Compensation board can give out Employee Options as they see fit. The $10 options seem to be given to her instead of Alex (he got less than he should). You can question the logic however: No Security Regulation Violations. "Dolgonos' relatives had the opportunity to make millions by exercising their stock options and selling the underlying shares. Whether they took advantage of that opportunity is not known. Since they were not classified as insiders, they were not required to disclose their trades." Yes they could of and it would be totally legal. So could of all the UBS investors who bought in under a $1 and sold at the highs. Baines goes on to talk about ALex & Stephen education and late insider fillings from 1999 that were dealt with. Rehash of January 2000 article. Baines motives are clear here "In one case, the insider -- wife of UBS president Alex Dolgonos -- sold more than $20 million worth of stock from a control position without giving public shareholders advance notice of her intent to sell, contrary to B.C. securities law." Rosen claims that: "advance notice is not required when shares are sold from a control party in a private transaction to a non-arm's-length party." Baines Does not agree with this. He quotes someone from the BCSC as his evidence. This person doesn't seem to be talking about the UBS case specifically and I doubt she has the full details. What the actual security regulation is for advance notices is not known. The BCSC hasn't said anything in three months, so it seems they do not have a problem. I hope everybody realizes that they do check on these things. Also important to realize what the issue here is. Dolgonos did timely report the sale. The issue is filing a form giving notice of planning to sell. The 5 Million transaction in question was a private transaction. Shares were not sold on the market. The advance filing, whether required or not, would of had no effect on UBS shareholders. Baines claims Regulation violation. UBS claims no Violation. This is the basis for the "erroneous" claim that UBS has made. No proof of violation, but Baines clearly states that it is. These are the main issues and statements made. I hope this article forces everybody to understand the facts so that UBS can move forward and we can start talking about the Technology. Some people will claim I am trying to defend management. I am just pointing out the facts. I am sure the BCSC will say fine Dolgonos if they find any problems (haven't so far -- another fact). Have fun Yelling and Shouting for the rest of the evening. P.S. I can't believe Baines asked to talk to Alex's wife who is sick with a Kidney disease and recovering at home. (thanks to montema at SH - timester)

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next