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.

Technology Stocks : EDTA (was GIFT) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: bigbadalan who wrote (2312)	1/18/2000 11:14:00 AM
From: Arnold Freilich	Respond to of 2383

Mr. Spira, I'm not interested in getting in the middle of this situation, not am I willing to endorse either side in any way. I'm no longer a shareholder, but I sincerely hope that whoever ends up on top keeps the shareholder interests foremost in mind. As to specifics, I don't know when you met Grant and I don't care. I do know that you've been constantly involved in the company since 1995 (and before that since the first thing I did was clean up some early messes). To blame the current situation on management alone (either Grant or mine) is absolutely unfair. I have no desire to speak to you, Grant or anyone else involved in the Company. I am sorry that Steve Schwartz and his firm resigned because I believe he has always been a calming influence and worked for the best interests of the shareholders.

To: bigbadalan who wrote (2312)	1/18/2000 8:13:00 PM
From: Mel Spivak	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2383

CEO Grant Robertson responds: A little more of what is going on in E-Data. After the statement, released on the Web by Mr. Spira, I felt the fiction should be followed by some facts. My name is Grant Robertson and I am the President/CEO and Director of E-Data. First let me make a general statement and follow it with some specific verifiable facts. What Mr. Spira doesn't say is that the Meeting he did try to call was in conflict with the By-laws and Quorum requirements of this Company. It would have had the effect of disenfranchising the majority of shareholders of their voting rights. That attempt was stopped by us and the Meeting we will have will allow all Shareholders to exercise their voting rights. When my proxy pack was printed I did not know who was to be the opposing board as the proxy received from them did not state who was to stand. I do find it somewhat unusual that when I was approached I was told that the main plank of their business plan for E-data's future was to pursue infringers of our patent in other states and jurisdictions. They intended to ignore the New York judgement and pursue potential infringers on our interpretation of what the patent may cover. After conversations with our legal counsel, patent attorneys and myself, where they were informed that our appeal is to the Federal Circuit and that every state and circuit is subservient to that authority and that therefore their action would only succeed in counter suits, sanctions and damage to this Company, did they drop the idea. Now, perhaps you will ponder on, how three "patent savvy lawyers," could have made such a fundamental error. Lastly, let me address the fiction and the facts: Fiction: No meeting was called by current Management. Fact: It was only the current Management that wished to call a meeting and that was to be done after the completion of a 504 Offering. Fiction: Director resigned in frustration with management. Fact: This Director resigned when he was informed of the misappropriation of funds intended for this company. He was not involved but could devote no time to the Company. Fiction: Board of five, none live in the United States and four are foreign nationals. Fact: Two are American citizens, and proud of it, and one lives in New Jersey. All five proposed Directors have substantial U.S. and European business experience over the past twenty five years. Fiction: Violation of the Utah TRO and American Securities laws. Fact: We have followed the agreed stipulation with the Utah Court to the letter and there is no violation of securities laws. Fiction: Sell additional shares to one of the Directors at a bargain price. Fact: I do not have a clue as to what Mr. Spira is saying, NO director was offered shares. Shares were sold to new investors, based on an amended offering document prepared by myself, which complies with security laws. Fiction: Friends in at a cheap price. Fact: This offering was done at the SAME price as the first part of the 504 offering, that is $.15 and a participant in THAT offering with 75,000 shares was MR. SPIRA. I can't remember hearing of this complaint at that time. Fiction: Opinion Letter to the transfer agent. Fact: The transfer agent acted under another legal opinion. Fiction: 504 Shares were not for resale. Fact: The person mentioned in this discussion did NOT purchase any shares in this offering. Other investors purchased shares directly. Fiction: Nominee threatening this Company with litigation. Fact: At NO time has there been ANY threat made to this Company. But litigation is now taking place against Companies and individuals connected to the missing 504 funds. I have attempted to turn E-Data into a long term viable Company, it is the right of all shareholders to choose if they wish an alternative option, at least now they ALL have the opportunity to vote not just a chosen few that would have occurred if Mr. Spira's meeting had been allowed to proceed. But let that choice be based upon facts and a coherent alternative business plan. It does seem strange that all this activity comes immediately after we commenced an investigation to find $800,000 that was paid in good faith by Investors, was never passed to this Company, and is now missing. As Mr. Spira would say "I will leave this for you to judge." Grant Robertson E-Mail. grantrobertson@msn.com