To: SI_Watcher who wrote (27261 ) 4/7/1999 10:16:00 AM From: R. Murphey Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 27968
SI Watcher, IMOHO you are touching on the essence of the problems here. Today's probable affirmative votes on the proxy issues are a sick confirmation of the intents of management. Changes to Article 9.5 eliminate the ability of shareholders to balance bad Board decisions. Changes to Article 8 give a blanket of financial protection to management acting outside their fiduciary responsibility. The reverse split, preferred stock, and options nullify or erase all current "outside" shareholders. The company then has a super tanker full of shares to re-issue to a new group of unsuspecting investors, and they can do it again and again. So far IMO, this company has been all about profiting from investors, not about the business itself. Dun & Bradstreet determined (analyzing 60,000 business failures) that 30% +/- occur in 3-yrs. and 50% in 5 yrs. Others determined (and my consulting experiences bear this out, that it is the quality of management that determines the performance and outcome in almost 90% of all troubled businesses. The most probable, positive way to to improve a failing business is to replace incompetent management and the probability of success increases when this is done early. Everyone here remembers the 1998 financials are supposed to be available today. They will tell the story. They have had two "extensive" audits and a year of improving systems and procedures, consolidating functions and reporting, etc. They knew, or should have known, how to account for all the pennies in a timely fashion. Companies a whole lot bigger and more complicated can do it quarterly. Again, IMHO, the financial picture, and limited abilities of management, will necessitate the reverse and immediate issuance of shares to raise operating funds. Unless management changes 180 degrees, it will be a temporary reprieve, as the holes are dug again. Management will tout how great they are, but one must remember how it was all financed, ......by dead and gone investors. The new infusion of investor capital will cover the sins but the it will be many years before operations can erase the blight imposed on all shareholders. FSAAA is making a valiant attempt to speak for shareholders wronged by the actions of company management. It was/is known to be an uphill battle as the deck is severely stacked against all outside shareholders, and will become even more so. Is FSAAA wrong, or right, to continue pressing for the truth, accountability, and change on behalf of investors? I personally think they've done a great job, given the time constraints, the complexities of dealing with the "securities" mechanisms, and limited, ineffective methods for communicating with shareholders. In my mind, the most telling feature of the all the surprise share issuances "discovered" by investigative investors on this thread, was the results of an inquiry I made to the SEC under the Freedom of Information Act. The SEC's response, received just 4-days ago, was "startling" and will have to be verified before sharing it all. There is some data within the SEC related to Firamada, Inc. Understanding the SEC may have problems of it's own, and there may be some technical issues involved, I found one line was very, very interesting. The SEC letter stated, among other things related to my specific inquiries:"According to our records, Firamada, Inc. is not a publicly traded company". Now, "put that s*** in your pipe and smoke it.........." What did you think the situation was all along? Regards, Bob.