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 : Inflazyme Pharmaceuticals (T.IZP) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: xray who wrote (1047)	8/27/1998 7:48:00 PM
From: Harold Lehman	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1501

If you read what I wrote about authorized share capital then you know it was obvious that what I wrote about having an increase in authorized share capital in order to split the stock was strictly a cynical joke. My point earlier was to give management options only after they've done something positive for us long-suffering shareholders. When they prove their competance, then and only then, will I vote to reward their performance. Do you propose to reward someone for what so far has been a catastrophic performance? Are they supposed to be put in the same category as people who have achieved something we can all see, such as Michael Dell, etc.? By the tone of your post I have to wonder whether you're an insider of this company or a friend or relative thereof. Please tell me why you care so much about not rewarding someone (insiders) for what seems to most shareholders to be a lousy job so far, esp. when you don't even seem to own any shares. To specifically answer your question, my idea, to reiterate, is to give them options when they've enriched us. That's a strong incentive for them to do something good. HL