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: sh who wrote (18977)	5/4/1999 9:45:00 PM
From: Larry Macklin	Respond to of 20681

No i am not happy---but if you are saying that father gregory reniged on the entire deal because bob gardner is not currently a board member then i am REALLY not happy (not to mention that i dont beleive that for a second). I beleive that father greg had no intention of going thru with the deal. He thought he had the votes and tried to take complete control.....thats a fact. And now you are saying that father gregorys group wont put money into the company because bob gardner is not on the board!!! He has his 4 people on the board as was agreed to....but now he wont put money into the company? So what you are saying is that he would rather see the company go bankrupt now that he doesnt have complete control? That is a really a CONCERNED SHAREHOLDER......concerned about himself and no one else. The company will be able to raise money from real investors...not half-baked control-hungrey lunatics!!!! Larry Macklin

To: sh who wrote (18977)	5/5/1999 8:43:00 AM
From: soxan	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20681

Hey sh, you should go on over to ragingbull and read Fairview's post #78, she was there you were not. Judy tells the truth, not you, soxan

To: sh who wrote (18977)	5/5/1999 9:36:00 AM
From: Henry Volquardsen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20681

Mornin' Since I doubt you will follow up on soxan's lead I thought I would help you out and bring over the Raging Bull post. I just read #18981 written by "sh" and I am just LIVID! shE states WERE YOU AT THE AGM, sh??? I WAS !! YOU ARE WRONG !! ....YOU ARE FULL OF __it, sh. You are so full of venom, you can't discern truth from fiction. It was F. Gregory who reneged, who went back on his word, who had no honour, who proved himself a power-monger, who became the Judas. I WAS THERE and I was disgusted with his betrayal, having gone to the AGM with an open mind. Even his trembling body belied his "saintly" self-image.......but his bluff was called. And then he even chose not to serve !! Next time there's a meeting of Naxos shareholders, BE THERE or don't bother commenting. I was there listening to Bob Gardner as he announced the 8 nominees as agreed to by F. Gregory as per the accord...and it was F. Gregory who then stood (as Kim Brasington explained in his news release) and insisted on nominating an additional 4 !! To my mind, he just let his lawyers run roughshod & revelled in it !! He didn't do a thing without their prompting, it sure looked like to me. And his lawyers didn't even let the meeting get 5 minutes underway before they attempted their disruption, their betrayal, their mutiny. Yes, THERE'S the analogy: They'd agreed to sit in the same lifeboat as the other group, but once adrift, they tried to wrest the oars from the hands of those they'd agreed to SHARE them with. No freaking honour, believe me.....and as was noted earlier..he calls himself a man of the cloth. Tch, tch, tch. ragingbull.com

To: sh who wrote (18977)	5/5/1999 9:39:00 AM
From: Henry Volquardsen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20681

here is another for you Gals and Guys, look up in phycology books what a Blocker or a Blocker Tactic is in dealing with a group or in the discident way of NOT negioating a deal ( let's NOT make a deal to go forward and hense have PROGRESS!) Father Greg.( my spelling has a problem today) IMHO, the dissidents had not intention of going forward, and thus I fear for the future. IF THEY DON'T START SUPPORTING a forward looking agenda...their motives will be viewed as suspect from day one. If they intend to BLOCK progress as it may appear with the added 4 upon 4 directors, and Father Greg and his refusal to serve,,,well, that is just a power and control issue play in which we all loose. Including father G and his Group. Wise up. Chucaup ragingbull.com