MikeH, agreed.
Given the recent, and wonderfully coincidental reappearance of our short friends on this thread, I'd say it's a good bet that there's still a strong short interest out there.
It's obvious that the purpose behind 3002 is to create doubt among shareholders, influence management, and strengthen 3002's position. We could hypothesize several parties, including the shorts, who might benefit from this misguided tactic.
Shareholders need to take a deep breath, and pause a moment and consider the facts of this situation, and the bigger picture. This is precisely the time to avoid a knee-jerk reaction. This is precisely the time not to play into the hands of 3002 and the shorts. Whoever posted 3002 was attempting to use our susceptibility to that mentality. They want to create panic and selling pressure on Monday. IMO, hang tight. Above all, do not sell on Monday. Let the company get on top of this and sort things out. I have spoken with many shareholders, representing millions of shares, in the last few hours, and virtually without exception, they will be holding on.
Previous posts have correctly indicated that 'legal documents' of the kind which 3002 SEEM to be, are not typically leaked into an informal public media context (such as SI), unless the party presenting the document wishes to gain some advantage by influencing public opinion. (ie., the infamous leaks from Ken Starr's office). 3002 SEEMS to be an official document, but we have no proof of its origin nor the legal qualities of its substance. If the document in 3002 was a legitimate business communication, it should have been communicated directly to the company.
The text of 3002 may appear valid, but a close reading raises some major questions. For example, the statement: "...the agreement is unenforceable as it was never approved by the Chairman of the National Indian Gaming Commission as is required by 25 U.S.C. Section 2711..." is either incorrect, or not applicable. If you check the reference to 25 U.S.C. 2711 at:
www4.law.cornell.edu
you will see that this code only pertains to Class II gaming and not Class III. Class III is the area of the existing agreement between Sungold and Gun Lake. In other words, the apparent intention of 3002 is to produce the appearance of a legally substantive argument, so as to make it appear credible to legally untrained shareholders, while the actual arguments raised may be without merit.
3002 also includes the statement that the band "hereby gives notice to the public that it has terminated all business relationships with Sungold Gaming International effective November 30, 1998." This is very odd, to say the least, since it is my strong belief that representatives of the company met with, and had business discussions with representatives of the Band during the week of Jan. 4 - 8, 1999.
I'm suggesting that if questions of inappropriate manipulation of shareholders are to be raised here, they should be directed towards the person(s) responsible for 3002. Keep in mind that Sungold has always acted in good faith with the Gun Lake Band. Sungold has provided enormous resources, financial and otherwise in the campaign to assist Gun Lake to achieve federal recognition and develop a Class III gaming facility. I believe that Sungold has fulfilled all its contractual obligations. This assistance over many years is a matter of public record, and is proof of the ongoing mutual contract between Sungold and the Band. That legal bond cannot be altered by a post on an investor chat line.
In matters which involve hundreds of millions of annual revenue, there will always be intense negotiations. The various parties will compete, sometimes with peculiar tactics, to assert their own interests. Look at the hardball negotiations that occur between sports mega-stars and team owners. Negotiations are often vicious and public; mediators are often required. Sometimes there are walk-outs, strikes and eleventh hour round the clock meetings; but once a compromise is reached, they kiss and make up and get on with making hundreds of millions of dollars. The reality, especially in the U.S. today, is that litigation, or intense legal discussions, in these situations, is the norm.
Anyone is free to criticize me or my intentions. The truth, as those who have known me over the years of our involvement with Sungold, is that I, and other family members, are shareholders. None of us have sold, or benefited in any financial way through my involvement with Sungold and this chat line. My interests are the same as many shareholders. It's true that I talk with the company, but I have frequently also been critical, and in no way do I represent the company.
As a last point, FWIW, I am confident in my opinion that Ted Carter, in his newsletter on Sunday, will be issuing a call to support the company, hold your shares, and to do everything in your power to assist the company. IMO, we should guard against the company and shareholders being held ransom by an unverified post on an investor chat line.
Anyone who's talking about wallpaper and porcelain highways at this point is very mistaken. The fact is that some entity has misused an investor chat-line for their own devious purpose. Sungold has a contract in Michigan and an exciting project in Richmond Downs. I belief that determined efforts will be made to ensure that shareholders' interests are protected.
|
