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 : Naxos Resources (NAXOF) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Larry Macklin who wrote (13578)	6/15/1998 9:54:00 PM
From: jlallen	Respond to of 20681

Larry: I own GE and Intel. This ain't no GE or Intel. Second, how many of the "repricing events" involve situations where just one stockholder is affected. Just wondering. Have you read the management proxy circular? JJ is on managements slate of directors. From what I can discern from the proxy, JJ owns the lion's share of ALL outstanding options granted under any plan the company ever had. He also has an indefinite "Management Agreement" with the company which pays him $3,500 per month plus expenses. Sid's law firm is also compensated last year to the tune of over $200,000.00. Now I'm sure some will say this is all normal, etc. Just makes me wish there was a management job open. JLA PS Whose wife owns Oxford?

To: Larry Macklin who wrote (13578)	6/15/1998 9:56:00 PM
From: ShoppinTheNet	Respond to of 20681

"You people need to get in the real world!!! Why don't you check and see what major corporations like GE and Intel do with stock options? Most, if not all, major corporations pass out options and adjust option prices all the time. Options are a tool to get employees to work and build positive moral. If a stock is so far out of the money it produces the opposite effect and productivity and moral both suffer from it,not to mention employee turnover." Correct you are Larry, this does indeed happen all the time! Is it illegal? No it is not! That is the point, if you feel it is not right then you have a decision to make. Discuss your plans on ethics with the board or at the stockholders meeting. If you don't feel strong enough about your beliefs to do this, then it is not that important, so quit crying about it. As I understand it Oxford did indeed lower their options to its employees. This was done for the reasons you discussed. I have said it before and I will say it again. I don't feel there is a consensus on this thread as to what is ethical and what is not. I also believe if you want to get the issue resolved you need to discuss it pro and Con. Now you have done a fine job of stating the pro to the issue so we need to thank you for having the strength to stand up and to be counted. My hat is off to you Larry! No does anyone want to refute Larry's position or should we consider the case closed? P.S. I think you left out the fact that they also extend the expiration date as well!

To: Larry Macklin who wrote (13578)	6/16/1998 6:31:00 AM
From: Kurt R.	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 20681

Larry: I believe some share holders like to address the issues contained in the Proxy Management Circular because they literally jump in your face. Not discussing those issues does not make them go away. I don't agree that openly addressing questionable transactions harms the company's reputation. The opposite may be the case, at least long term. After all, if loyal share holders don't ask hard questions, you can be sure somebody else will. You may be correct that other major companies, like GM or Intel may reprice incentive stock options. I have no problem if the CEO of successful, profitable company makes a ton of money through sock options. However, there is a huge difference between Naxos and the companies you mentioned. While those companies actually earn a profit and even pay dividends, Naxos is a mining exploration company with share holder's money being the sole source of funds. In this respect, you are comparing apples and oranges, Larry. You also suggested that all we can do about JJ's dealings if we disagree is vote against him at the ballot. Great, but here comes the catch: According to the ballot, in its present form, you can not vote against any candidate for director. The choices you have are: IN FAVOUR or ABSTAIN. Is that a typo? SK suggested that we put together some ethics guidelines for the "new and better management". Here are my first random thoughts on this. 1. Clearly list all voting shares, warrants, stock options, etc. currently held by insiders and their family members. 2. Revoke all stock options held by those officers and directors who have exhibited a self-serving and manipulative behavior in the past. 3. Cancel the $733,107 director loan by July 24, 1998. 4. Undo the stock option repricing on the 380,000 shares. 5. Keep the trading halt for insiders in effect until all numbers from the current drill program are publicly known. Thereafter, limit the number of shares an insider can trade per year to a reasonable amount, e.g., 25% of his total holdings. 6. Limit the total annual number incentive stock options issued to anyone, including outside consultants, to no more than 0.75% of the total shares outstanding (which is still generous). This curb should be in effect at least until the company generates a profit. At the time the company does generate a per share profit, this percentage could be raised, but a reasonable upper limit should remain in effect as a general guideline for the number of incentive stock options to be disbursed. 7. Openly address conflicts of interest where company insiders, or their affiliated businesses, provide goods or services to the company for payment. 8. Limit the number of shares - all insiders combined - can purchase in private placement to no more than 10% of the total number of shares issued at any placement. Anyone, feel free to comment and/or add to this list. Management should at least know how share holders feel about ethics. Maybe this will help them to not only build a profitable gold mine but also to establish an impeccable reputation. That is my expectation of the new management. Kurt