RE:RE:RE:URGENT MESSAGEI spoke to Bob Hemmerling (FCU office manager) about this for more then an hour today. Still don't have a definitive answer and he refused to put it in writing or have me record him say that management would not use unvoted shares but he seemed to suggest that this would not happen. It bothers me that he would not go on record to say that - very suspicious but he essentially agreed with what you said Mesa. A senior senior person at computershare told me that the opinions I got previously from computershare were not appropriate and they are reviewing the old recorded phone conversations I had with two reps at computershare to see what actually transpired in those conversations. Essentially computershare will not vote unvoted shares but the point that is unclear is what happens between oct 9 and the oct 14 meeting after computershare is done with handing the sumbitted proxy forms. Two computershare people told me, as per the highlighted point 5 from the proxy form, that FCU management could use those unvoted shares. But this senior senior guy I spoke to most recently said that the people in Missasauga and Quebec from computershare I spoke to previously should not even be commenting upon what FCU management would be doing as it is not their realm and that, as far as they are concerned, computershare follows proxy protocol and would not vote unvoted shares as per management's recommendations. So we have to take FCU at their word that these unvoted shares won't be used despite the seemingly contradictory wording in that bolded point 5 from the proxy form
I will update you with anything else I hear about this matter, but to be on the safe side - EVERYONE VOTE NO and assume the worst about unvoted shares to insure that the merger is voted down.
I also told Bob that the hard sell by Kingsdale is an unnecessary drain on the treasury and essentially a conflict of interest for management to be pushing so hard for the merger - given their materially different interests in this merger going through. His response was that the Kingsdale people were not supposed to be badgering people to vote yes and that he would talk with others to ensure that this is not the case.
I also told him that the exclusion of Dev and Ross's shares from voting should have extended to all FCU employees as these people, who may have significant FCU holdings, also have materially different interests in this merger (keeping their jobs and receiving bonus money etc).
we had a nice long chat and I am sure he will block my number after that conversation ;)
EI1
mesa1 wrote: No! Only proxies submitted with Dev as the appointee AND the actual FOR or AGAINST left blank can be voted for the deal by management.
If you don't submit the proxy either online or physically, it is not included in the vote at all.
Uranimom wrote: I wonder about all this. So far as I know, uncast votes are, well, uncast. Is it in fact absolutely permissible for mgmt to use (i.e., vote) uncast votes? There is a similar posting on the Concered Fission Shareholders FB page. If allowable, it would seem we are not out of the woods at all.
I am waiting for my mail today in another 2 hours or so, but thus far, no voting package received.
If nothing by Monday p.m., any suggestions? What is this Compushare Control #, etc. I don't have gajillions of shares, but not so few either.
About the falling share price, being attributed to the "No campaign," well you flatter us. Who knows really? In the interests of providing
balance, we DO KNOW THIS:
Before any people decided to become assertive/vociferous/p'ss'd off/proactive/concerned/worried/outraged/methodically and thoroughly resistant, news of the merger
did not move up the SP of either firm by one cent. It
did start an
immediate, enormous round of arbitraging probably by savvy traders, as well as an increase in short positions.
MissingA9 wrote:
pertaining to the below points - this only refers to Computershare voting shares. The proxy states definitively that management will use any unvoted shares to vote as per management recommendations. Therefore - any one who abstains from voting will be a YES vote!!! This was told to me by two computershare managers. So the push to discourage people from voting is an attempt my management to steal these votes and try to push the corrupt merger through
immediate clarification needed!!!
see the below points from the voting instructions on the investorvote.com site - does this mean that management can use unvoted shares as they please???
1. The proxy-related materials that were sent to you relate to a meeting of the holders of the series or class of securities that are held on your behalf by an intermediary. Unless you attend the meeting and vote in person, your securities can be voted only by Management, as proxy holder of the registered holder, in accordance with your instructions.
2. We are prohibited from voting these securities on any of the matters to be acted upon at the meeting without your specific voting instructions. In order for these securities to be voted at the meeting, it will be necessary for us to have your specific voting instructions. Please complete and return the information requested in this VIF to provide your voting instructions to us promptly.
4. When properly executed, securities represented by this online VIF will be voted as directed by you, however, if such a direction is not made in respect of any matter, the VIF will direct the voting of the securities to be made as recommended in the documentation provided by Management for the meeting.