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.

Non-Tech : Littlefield Corporation (LTFD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: T.K. Allen who wrote (8443)	5/5/1998 11:49:00 AM
From: Amp Grewal	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10368

Good call TK, if we collectively voice our opinions in a professional manner, I'm certain he would pay heed to our concerns. We certainly don't want to antagonize him, however pissed off we are. If we can voice these concerns without bombarding him with multiple e-mail notes, he should be willing to address them. Comments?? Amp

To: T.K. Allen who wrote (8443)	5/5/1998 1:23:00 PM
From: Robert L. Akers	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10368

I think a letter like that would be a good move. I think we can come up with a good list of concerns and questions, as we have in the past. If we do, I think it would be good for it to bear our names. I know we have had no luck in collectively divulging our share holdings in the past, and for very good reasons of privacy. But the company will have our proxy statements, and if they choose to tally the shares, I think they will find a very large bloc represented. We should also consider options for the forum for the company's response. Factors that have limited communication in the past are the need for relative brevity in the conference calls and the need to ensure that inside information is not being selectively disclosed to some shareholders and not (or only secondarily) to others. The web site seems like a good place for baseline answers. If a response were posted prior to the annual meeting, perhaps the inevitable follow-up questions could be formulated and posed at the meeting. Larry

To: T.K. Allen who wrote (8443)	5/5/1998 6:11:00 PM
From: Nittany Lion	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10368

TK, I too like the idea about the letter - even though many of the Feb. questions were never really answered, they did address some of the more critical issues and Mr. Hilliou should be anxious to start out on a positive note. I'll begin: 1. What exactly is the business plan? 2. Are you waiting for the S.C. court decision before investing the W.C. money? 3. What are the five Mississippi Corps. listed as subsidiaries on the 10K? 4. Please explain the discrepancy in machine count, ie. form 10K lists 755 machines but S.C. Machine Game Quarterly shows 917. 5. Please discuss the current Management Salary Agreements On another note, I would love to know where Mr. Hilliou is currently employed - they don't seem too anxious to disclose this in the three separate announcements on his hiring. Also, I wonder who it is that Mr. Hilliou prefers over Mr. Gilbert for a seat on the board, and why? It just occurred to me that I am assuming you are willing to draft this letter - I'm sure those of us left will appreciate it, if you are. Gary