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.

Microcap & Penny Stocks : NCDR -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jacalyn Deaner who wrote (588)	6/5/1999 3:55:00 PM
From: Q.	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1440

How did the co. change its name from Corsaire to Net Command Tech without filing a final proxy & seeking a shareholder vote? In February, Rene Hamouth (Chairman, President and sole Director) filed a preliminary PRE14 proxy for a shareholders meeting: You are hereby notified pursuant to Article II, Section 2 of the Corporation's By-laws, that a Special Meeting of the shareholders of Corsaire, Inc. (the "Corporation") at 3838 Camino del Rio North, Suite 333, San Diego, California 92108, on _________________, 1999, at 10:00 a.m. Pacific Standard Time, for the sole purpose of considering and voting upon the following matter: 1. To amend the Articles of Incorporation to change the Corporation name to "NET COMMAND TECH, INC." edgar-online.com This preliminary filing had only a blank line listed in place of the date of the shareholders meeting. Normally these details would be completed by filing a definitive DEF14 proxy a few weeks before the actual meeting. However, no such proxy was filed. Nevertheless the latest 10Q filing says "The Company changed its name to Net Command Tech, Inc. in May 1999." edgar-online.com Which makes me wonder whether they made the name change without having an actual shareholders vote. It wouldn't be the first time that they screwed up the validity of the corporate identity. Hamouth and Bua controlled over 50% of the shares, so they can determine the outcome of the vote, but just the same they should have sought the votes of all shareholders. The definitive proxy would also have an updated list of officers and directors, and an updated list of 5% shareholders. This would be very useful for investors.

To: Jacalyn Deaner who wrote (588)	6/5/1999 8:39:00 PM
From: Arthur_Porcari	Read Replies (6) \| Respond to of 1440

Jacalyn, The company is in the late stages of negotiation to retain a very large PR firm out of NY. The same firm that represents one of the worlds largest and oldest stock brokerage firms and several other Fortune 500 companies. Not a stock tout firm, but a legitimate product introduction firm. I believe you will be very impressed with the Company's Investment Banking firm First American out of Tampa. The firm is relatively new and is backed by several very large investors that have made serious money the last few years in High Tech stocks. Pete Peterson heads the IBK section of the firm. I have met him and I can tell you he is a very impressive individual. He really knows his client, and will keep the Company well funded. The website is new and very much still under construction. Re: Donovant's Bio, I am not sure where you saw his claiming praise from Forbes. It does show on the website bio that he was Inc. Magazines Entrepreneur of the Year in 1995. To my knowledge they have never tried to claim back the award from him or have published any type of negative story about him. But nothing about Forbes. I strongly suggest you do check into the background of Bream and Morgan. I am sure you have already noticed that none of "Pinky's Pimps" on this board have been able to find anything negative about either. Or you can bet it would be posted. I think you will find it interesting why these two individual's after having been senior officers at multi-billion dollar corporations (Xerox, Epson, Wireless &Cable) elected to join this little BB company as upper middle level managment for what most would consider meger compansation packages, when either are well qualified and and would be welcomed as President of any number of much larger and proven companies. I know why, lets see if you can find out as well. I would be surprised if in fact you are involved with any other firm that is currently involved with NCT. I believe I do know what associations they currently have and all are top notch. Perhaps you might be thinking of some past associations that former managment may have had such as HSNS or Summus (nothing working currently to my knowledge) or even further back to a time when none of the current managment was involved. I would be interested as to who you might be thinking. And frankly, I don't really have a clue what you are trying to say in this comment? My concern with this company is that I am involved with another firm that may have association with NCDR and any negativity associated with same persons may have a detrimental affect on that valuation; to sever ties or not to sever ties" Other then the split retraction, I don't really see any PR's that were done in May that would need updating. All the forms were filed, the Name Change is effected, and the new officers are still on board. What in particular might you be referring to?