Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : Ultra Petroleum (UPL) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Hickory who wrote (4376)	9/10/1999 4:36:00 PM
From: kfdkfd	Respond to of 4851

Nice day, great VOL over 1 million. Stock went over C$2 and closed at C$1.95. Next week action again.

To: Hickory who wrote (4376)	9/11/1999 8:25:00 AM
From: Bob Walsh	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 4851

Regarding suit against Arrowhead naming UP: of course UP is named in the lawsuit - they own the land. If you lease land to party "A" and "A" then enters into an "agreement" (valid or invalid)with "B" to provide "B" with use of the land and "A" then refuses to honor the "agreement" with "B", any suit by "B" against "A" would have to name you also since you own the land and you and "A" could change the original terms. Regarding common directors of UP and Arrowhead: even if (big IF) a common director voted as an Arrowhead director and such vote was against the best interests of Arrowhead, UP would not have any liabilities. A director of a corporation can not create liability for the corporation by his or her individual private actions even though such actions may benefit the corporation. If the majority of the corporate directors voted or asked the director to take such actions, then the corporation MAY have a liability. Information contained in the lawsuit filing amount to unproven allegations which are often extreme to put pressure on the other party and which may never be proven. Regards, Bob