ENERGIZER RESOURCES INC T.EGZ

1:5 to 1:10 reverse stock split proposed

[WDriscoll]

I just read the annual meeting notice and the big item up for vote this year is a vote to allow the board, at any time they choose in the next year, to authorize a reverse stock split from between 1:5 and 1:10. The main reasons they give are regarding a hypothetical sentiment improvement to increase the perceived legitimacy and viability of the company so that brokers will have an easier time promoting the company to potential investors in their brokerages. My beef with that idea is how much more legitimate or viable does a stock share price of between $.25 and .50 with the respective 1:5 to 1:10 reverse split actually present. $.25 to $.50 is still going to be perceived as a penny stock and investors and brokerages will still see this company as risky at best with more room for the share price to decrease than it does presently. I, for one, will be voting my 900k shares in the negative for this proposal unless someone on this board can present a good argument in favor of the reverse stock split...any thoughts?

[frewil11]

I felt this was going to happen thats why I sold off awhile ago but recently have picked up some at these low prices, 20k have always liked their product .  

[WDriscoll]

The only way it makes sense to me is if the share price is already at .25 before they do the reverse split so that the share price goes to between $1.25 to $2.50 depending on the ratio they approve. Then I could see their points about breaking out of the "penny stock" mold. If the FEED study is released this month as projected and maybe an agreement signed and the stock is at $.25 or

[riverrock]

Proxy Statement - Notice of Shareholders Meeting (preliminary) (pre 14a)https://ih.advfn.com/p.php?pid=nmona&article=72768291 Please scroll Down to: PROPOSALS TO BE CONSIDERED BY STOCKHOLDERS In Proposal No.3 they propose: “To authorize the board of directors of the Company to effect a reverse stock split of our outstanding common stock in a ratio of between one-for-five and one-for-ten, in

[StoogeNo4]

We should have filed a class action suit for gross negligence years ago.  This is the result of not having done so.  I throw the idea back on the table.

[StoogeNo4]

The option to sue was discussed among a number of us privately several years ago but not acted upon for fear of damaging the share price and losing all of our money.  At this point in time, management's malfeasance can no longer be ignored.  It's bad enough that they did everything in their power, despite our adamant protests (and there is plenty of evidence), to dilute the stock

[StoogeNo4]

RETRACTION: I should not have said: "But either way it's time to make a decision: sell or sue."  So I retract that statement as I am not making a threat. You do as you think is best.  Regardless, it is still my strong opinion that shareholders have been pushed around and there is no evidence in the world that can dispute that long-term shareholders have been destroyed by

[goodtoreadthis]

.05 is just too close to zero. 460 mill shares is a staggering number for a company trying to jump into production. The change harms u not at all. Only hold 128 K shares