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 : Sideware Systems - SYD.u/V, SDWSF -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: AGORA who wrote (3001)	5/15/1998 2:50:00 AM
From: Harmattan	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6076

Thank you Agora, We appreciate the comment and look forward to your update within the next day or two. I was aware the latest public statement was a VSE Notice and it is very good to hear from you that SYD was not party to it. That favorably alters perception but in itself raises a question that I believe deserves explanation or at least clarification. What was the VSE's intention and what did they object to regarding the filing? If you can include the same in the update (as you suggested) that would be great. Thanks for making the point that the funding at issue remains in place. If you hear any differently please let us know. I recall some of that particular funding is targeted for marketing and publicity. If it is pulled that would definitely affect plans in the near future. Thanks again for stopping by. ghunk

To: AGORA who wrote (3001)	5/16/1998 8:12:00 PM
From: Harmattan	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6076

Agora, Please reconcile the following two statements: "The company has withdrawn its filing of the preliminary exchange offering prospectus dated Oct. 24, 1997."--from 5/15/98 press release and "The latest press release was put out by the VSE and not SYD. As such, none of us were aware it was coming, including SYD." ---from Agora post #3001 on SI (5/14/98) Did the company know or did the company not know about the withdrawl of filing BEFOREHAND? ----------- and from todays clarification release: The annual information form is a new filing allowed this year by the B.C. Securities Commission. Many companies are filing AIFs rather than EOPs. It is a much more streamlined procedure. There is a real benefit to shareholders, because the AIF provides for the disclosure of forward-looking information.(bolding and italics mine) Perhaps I misunderstand. Please correct me. There has never been a regulatory prohibition on full disclosure. An AIF is not required to inform shareholders of a companies current status which would include truthful plans and ideas for the future. The final statement implies that until the recent introduction of AIF's, companies have labored under the burden of not being allowed to tell shareholders forward looking information. The only statements a company cannot make are untruthful or unreasonable forward looking statements. In the context of EOPs vs AIFs, what exactly is the reason for the existence of the quoted sentences? In the BCSC discussion leading up to the formulation of the new rules it is clear the intent is to create structures that foster continuous full disclosure to the secondary market (ie. full and current disclosure on an ongoing basis that approximates the standards found usually only in prospectus'). In other words, they were addressing the recognized problem that retail shareholders in the secondary market were not on a level playing field with primary shareholders as regards the disemination of information. To be plain, they were recognizing companies were not saying enough rather than that companies up to this time were not allowed to. Please don't wait until filing an AIF to tell us company plans. ghunk