Pr companies as way to publicize our problem with PLI restruI was thinking today that we seem to have much difficulty getting our opinions aired in the media. It then occurred to me why not use a internet PR company of which there are many. I had no info on what is involved but I called one up to see if I could get educated in this matter of how this all works. Corporations use them all the time for their press releases so I thought perhaps we can do the same to release our onions on the problems with PLI and the lack of transparency by both the TSX and the AMF in their investigations.
I called on such co but it was the US arm so they connected me to their Canadian sister PR co CNW. If we want to publish complaints against the CO then the policy of CNW is that our group must own at least 5% of the company and meet the publishing standards they require and all of course must be stated as opinion not as fact unless we document that as fact. There are of course charges but they are not huge and depend on the size of the piece and how wide the distribution. We can get around the 5% requirement if we do not mention the company (PLI) but make it for example an opinion piece about the lack of transparency when the AMF (or the TSX) investigates a case of fraud on the securities market or some such topic. This of course was just the policy of this PR co, there are many and perhaps there policies may be more attuned to our needs. I suggest that these be looked into as a way to make public our problem. If all the policies are similar at most of the PR cos then they not of much help unless we can validate a group of shareholders with greater than 5% ownership. They want names and size of holding for each group member so they can validate us through their database access to this info.