RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:What RW should doLook grasshopper, investment bankers, accountants, attorneys are all privy to insider information while conducting analysis/ negotiations on behalf of their clients. Didn't you ever watch wall street when Martin Scheen is brought into the board room and only then finds out how Gordon is going to take the company through liquidation to get ahold of the over funded pension? A JV or marketing/distribution agreement doesn't go to the shareholders to vote on. It's approved by the BoD after they have done their diligence and sought out alternatives. A sale of the company is different and would need a vote of shareholders.
As a shareholder of the company I trust RW to perform his diligence in negotiating any JV deals. RW has brought this company to this point while consuming very small amount of capital. A cure for cancer with $29 million retained deficit. TLT makes the rest of the biotech industry look ridiculous.
bionicjoe wrote: 2b7f6fab wrote: No, not illegal at all to conduct discussions with potential JV partners and solicit bids and keep it secret till late in the negotiations.
What planet are you from? bionicjoe wrote:
Would that not be illegal for TLT & OPKO insiders and their lawyers, accountants, respective bank managers, the janitor, etc to have confidential material information that they could then trade the stock with? I can just see the OSC being inundated with complaints from angry shareholders who were left out of the information loop. The fair and proper way to hold a large JV is to present the facts to the BOD for their recommendation to shareholders should the company manifesto require a vote.You can have JV secrecy as the details are being hatched out between the parties but shareholders need to know right from the start that negotiations are taking place and in fact that the CEO is shopping a JV around. Last I looked this is still a publically run company.
I might ask the same question of you. It's absurd to think untold people that are not shareholders of TLT would have access to information that could radically change the sp. Just chatting over drinks is one thing but if it concerns sit down talks then TLT shareholders need to know they are going on right from the start. Not everyone in the stock market is honest or is that a new revelation for you? You can't tell this SH board that as a partial owner of TLT you wouldn't demand that you hear it first or are you suggesting shareholders have to rely on rumors while others are playing the market with the facts? CEO's are fallible and they don't work for themselves but for shareholders of a company. Are you suggesting the CEO can sell the company to a bidder and then inform his shareholders after the fact and that's legal? Same would apply to a JV wouldn't it if I understand you correctly?