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 : PYNG Technologies -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Edward W. Richmond who wrote (6974)	2/18/2003 12:38:43 AM
From: Jack Rayfield	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 8117

Pyng Shareholder Register Update Shareholders Registered: 170 Total Shares Registered: 1,620,091 Good Email Addresses: 122 Shares represented 1,360,550 New Registration Since 2/3/03 68 New Registration Shares 441,780 (A) Confirmed "No" Votes 386,500 (B) Estimate Current "No" Votes 828,280 (A)+(B) I think that it is safe to say that we have 828,280 votes "No". As stated 387M have called or emailed me and the New Registrations surely care enough to vote or they would not have registered recently. There are several developments worth noting I was able to email the whole prior shareholder list of 108 before the proxy materials were received and the many alerts were posted so maybe they will not throw the proxy away. One problem last year was that we only had about 2.5 week to organize our efforts. I had one shareholder with 150K shares that had thrown away the materials and could not vote because the shares were owned in street name and they did not have the proper control number. Also if this year’s proxy is not buried in the middle of the materials surely this will have an positive effect on the number of shares voted. The more shares voted the better our chance. I think an advertisement in Vancouver is definitely in order and maybe Toronto and Quebec. We have a good start but let’s not depend on the BCSC stepping in to stop Pyng. Depending Mike's answer to my request to drop this question from the proxy voluntarily, we definitely have a case to say the Escrow Share issue is mute. I think there is a good chance the BCSC will side with us and say that the Escrow Shares expired 1/27/03 since this date and only this date been used at least 4 times in the Annual Information Forms just in FY2001 and FY2000. And only this date has ever been publish to the SEC and shareholders before the current proxy. This is the only date that shareholders could reasonably be expected to base their actions on. And since Pyng management has complete control over the proxy preparation procedure they have the responsibility to provide complete accurate information or suffer the consequences of misleading us by being made to stand by the date published. The only reason this issue is being revisited is we had the votes last year to settle this issue and defeat this amendment but management decided it would be best to delay the decision. The BCSC will certainly look into the fact that Pyng is using a date of expiry of May 10, 2003 that has never been published (and can only be inferred from adding 15 years to May 10, 1988) the proxy language “on or before May 10,2003” means that the established date can not be after May 10, 2003. I think that the BCSC will agree that management was free to establish a date prior to May 10, 2003. And in my opinion publishing an expiry date in the Annual Information Form 4 times constitutes establishment of a date. I think that 1.5MM shares is doable and probably will be enough but 2MM is my goal that will make the issue mute.