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.

Microcap & Penny Stocks : MTEI - Mountain Energy - No BASHING Allowed -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Moonglow who wrote (887)	6/13/1998 7:46:00 PM
From: Rock_nj	Respond to of 11684

This is true. I'm in a small non-profit corporation in NJ. According to state law, we only have to notifiy the state of officer changes when we file the annual report in December. So that might explain why the new officers of ME are not reflected on the report.

To: Moonglow who wrote (887)	6/14/1998 12:43:00 AM
From: jhild	Respond to of 11684

Interesting isn't it that they've got the name to the company changed, but they would wait to update the changes to the officers. One would think that if their intention is to start fresh as has been claimed that completing the disassociation with the old management would be a top priority along with changing the name. Unless, of course the old management really hasn't been replaced. Changing the officers is really an important material fact, especially if they all changed. We also have a report that that corporate creation sorcerer, John Christensen is still working out the offices of the supposedly new digs. Whatever the facts of the situation at this point I would say an on the record response is well in order to set aside any possible confusion about the continued participation of Mr. Christensen.

To: Moonglow who wrote (887)	6/14/1998 9:27:00 AM
From: Janice Shell	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 11684

I don't know when Nevada requires annual reports to be filed, but in Virginia, they are due April 1st. So....if someone in Virginia were to have a change of officer's in their corporation right now....the records would not reflect that until April 1, 1999. I would assume the filing date is likely to be different for different states; we'd have to know when Nevada's is. If Nevada's were, say, January first, this could explain why the EDII records haven't been altered yet. But what I wonder, quite simply, is: since MTEI was already registering a change of name, why not register a change of officers at the same time? One possibility, though this is pure speculation: permanent changes in management might be contingent on the results of a shareholders' vote, which may not yet have been conducted. The "new" MTEI could not, of course, have held a meeting, as they were not a public company until the merger with ICVI was complete.