RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:No ConsolidationHi StokTok1:
I absolutely agree with you and I am just as baffled as you.
Moreover, Ms. Coi's answer worries me. She seems to agree with me about the overall way this matter was handled and the attempt to kind of "slip it by us" but what really worries me is that she seems to be hinting that another such attempt will or may be forthcoming next year. The issue of non-votes should have been dealt with as "yes" votes as you mention, according to the Circular but there is discretionary powers here accorded the nominees i.e the aforementioned Proxy Board members noted at the top of the Form. So you are absolutely right. Of the almost 190M shares outstanding how come only approx. 57M or so were actually counted. Where were the rest??
As far as Ms. Coi's answer about positioning themselves pro-actively in the event a M/A arose...is she being "coy" about this? or was an acquisition targeted and in the process of being acted upon once the Company cleared up this consolidation issue? You see, in all likelihood such an M/A would involve shares, exclusively, where most likely ANX would offer the targeted asset ANX shares and this would have ballooned an already quite large share capital (approx. 190M). All very suspicious and as I have said all along, handled unethically. Did it happen deliberately to hide the consolidation proposal from us until the last moment on receiving our information package OR did a target suddenly appear that required expeditious action and there was no time for the Company (ANX) to follow the proper disclosure protocols as far as giving us, their shareholders, enough time and sufficient rationale and explanation to allow us to make informed decisions about selling or holding our shares well before the Record Date? These are questions that need to be clarified.
StokTok1, I like your initiative and we should not let Management off the hook here. A "YES" vote on this proposal could have wiped us out, as long-term shareholders. Just look at NightHawk Gold (NHK). I explained their situation sometime earlier (check one of my past postings). Their stock price just continues to slide slowly but surely downwards in spite of the occasional blip upwards. We must press Management for clear and unequivocal direction as to their future intentions with respect to any consolidation proposals again, going forward. If they are considering a target, then tell the shareholders that an opportunity has arisen that would require the exchange of shares and it would be more advantageous to ANX shareholders if its share capital was reduced down to allow for the issuance of more shares on the acquisition of an asset that would be immediately accretive; stock price positive; foster and accelerate growth and production targets; result in bottom-line and cash flow positive financials, and result in a market take-notice effect on the Company itself.
If someone could explain where all of the rest of the shares went and/or why Management did not use its discretionary powers, then I would be very much appreciative. As I have said before, the entire situation was underhanded and unethical as far as I can determine. StokTok1, I would have pressed Ms. Coi as to whether Management is or would consider proposing another such consolidation bid? If they did, the regulatory bodies of the OSC and the Exchange would frown upon it because shareholders have already spoken once and coming back with another such proposal would be like ANX spitting on its own shareholders.
Get back to me StokTok1 if you would like. I am surprised that so few bullboarders here seem to care so little about this issue. By the way, the Swiss Gold Initiative failed but gold shot up over $36.00 today hitting an intraday high of $1221.00/oz and closing at approx. $1218.00/oz U.S. as the only market sector today to end up in the green. I am wondering whether gold is about to finally turn the corner as most of the manipulators and speculators have finished with the precious metal. At the least. Dustin should have issued a statement explaining his actions and intentions with respect to this latest AGSM. If you noticed, Dustin used a "show of hands" of those present at the Meeting when considering the election of Board of Directors, but he reverted to the results of the actual ballots (Proxies) to determine the outcome of all of the other Proxy issues....why? Shouldn't he have been consistent about this and also used the results of the Proxy votes to determine Directors or was he worried that the Proxy votes could have resulted in some Directors being rejected. There is a big difference here because generally, only a handful of shareholders usually bother to come to a meeting and voting by a show of hands is so very unreliable.
Thanks again StokTok1...160K