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.

Technology Stocks : Thermo Tech Technologies (TTRIF) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: john b who wrote (5381)	4/6/1999 1:07:00 PM
From: Clement	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6467

John, I think the latter: > i.e. chum the waters with more stock and to net more shareholders? In a way it's quite ingenious -- either way naysayers be damned. If Rene does go away, they'll say "we told you so" (one of the few times they get to say so <g>), and if Rene doesn't go away, then it's just status quo with shareholders getting strung along with promises of bigger and bigger riches. Clement

To: john b who wrote (5381)	4/6/1999 1:22:00 PM
From: Clement	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6467

Tuesday April 6, 12:59 pm Eastern Time Company Press Release Trooper Technologies -- Thermo Tech Admits Contempt and Pays Fine of $50,000.00 VANCOUVER, British Columbia--(BUSINESS WIRE)--April 6, 1999 Further Punishment and the Contempt of Branconnier and Cumming to be Ruled Upon in the Near Future The Board of Directors is pleased to report that the application to punish the Thermo Tech companies and two officers and directors, Mr. Branconnier and Dr. Cumming, for contempt of Court with respect to their non-delivery of engineering specifications and drawings was heard on April 1, 1999 in the Supreme Court of British Columbia by the Honorable Mr. Justice Cohen. The Thermo Tech companies publicly admitted their contempt and announced that they paid to the Court the 50,000.00 fine on March 31, 1999, imposed against them for the contempt previously found against them on July 10, 1998. However, they argued that no further punishment, as sought by the Company should be imposed. The Company further submitted that, as Mr. Branconnier and Dr. Cumming were the persons who, in its view, actually carried out the wrongful acts, they should also be found guilty of contempt. For these individuals, it was argued that the evidence was not sufficient to have them personally found in contempt. The Court reserved judgement on the issue of further punishment against the Thermo Tech corporations and on whether to find Mr. Branconnier and Dr. Cumming guilty of contempt. We confidently expect that judgement will be delivered by the Court before the end of this month. The Company is now in position to proceed with the damage claim against Thermo Tech arising from their breach of contract for which they have been found liable by the Court. On Behalf of the Board of Directors Stan Lis President & CEO This news release has been prepared by the management of the company who takes full responsibility for its contents. The Vancouver Stock Exchange neither approves nor disapproves of the contents of this news release. This news release may include forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27a of the United States Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21e of the United States Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended with respect to achieving corporate objectives, developing additional products, expanding and diversifying the company's customer base and sales channels, the Company's analysis of various opportunities and certain other matters. These statements are made under the ''safe harbor'' provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 and involve risks and uncertainties which could cause actual results to differ materially from those in the forward-looking statements contained herein. This news release shall not constitute an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy, nor shall there be any sale of any securities of the company in any jurisdiction in which such offer, solicitation or sale would be unlawful prior of any such jurisdiction.