Join today and have your say! It’s FREE!

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Please Try Again
{{ error }}
By providing my email, I consent to receiving investment related electronic messages from Stockhouse.

or

Sign In

Please Try Again
{{ error }}
Password Hint : {{passwordHint}}
Forgot Password?

or

Please Try Again {{ error }}

Send my password

SUCCESS
An email was sent with password retrieval instructions. Please go to the link in the email message to retrieve your password.

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Quote  |  Bullboard  |  News  |  Opinion  |  Profile  |  Peers  |  Filings  |  Financials  |  Options  |  Price History  |  Ratios  |  Ownership  |  Insiders  |  Valuation

Bullboard - Stock Discussion Forum First Uranium Corporation T.FIU

TSX:FIU - Post Discussion

First Uranium Corporation > Voting default
View:
Post by uranicynic on May 02, 2012 10:49am

Voting default

I've contacted Gail Struass and she answered my question about whether there is a default to YES for shares that are not voted. This is her reply, 'As I understand it, it is shareholders that are present and voting, plus those who have submitted proxies'

I still think we have to be wary about management but it seems that abstentions are ignored.

Comment by shiftman on May 02, 2012 11:34am
I would imagine Gail has a hard enought time trying to fiqure out if her tampex is on sticky side up or not. Let alone asking difficult questions.  
Comment by Hmmmmmmm on May 02, 2012 3:47pm
Her answer is misleading. All other questions I have asked of her have had the disclaimer "As I understand it" Which means no matter what way you take it, FIU can say she misunderstood. If she had quoted thier legal dep't or made a definitive statement it would be different. Betsky is quoted as saying....... "Betsky calculates the magic number of shares required to vote down the ...more  
Comment by uranicynic on May 02, 2012 4:02pm
This vote is starting to resemble elections in a banana republic. Has management's credibility slunk so low that they would try to win dishonestly? I wish I could answer my own question with a NO but I can't. We have to be on guard, and your're right Hmmmmmmm, every vote counts.  
Comment by dubsbs on May 02, 2012 4:15pm
If that s the case doesn,t FIU need to have  80 mill yes votes to win. Or do they take the total votes and divide that into the yes's and no's .    If only 140 mill vote and we get 72 mill no's isn't  ezzy  voted down??????/
Comment by colt451 on May 02, 2012 4:32pm
The vote will only include share's voted in the 50.1% MWS calculation, which is great news for us. Because we have the three major shareholders on our side, the only possible way for the asset sale to go through is if all of us little guys sit at home and don't vote, and then FIU management pulls some shady backdoor rule no one knows about that allows them to use absent shares as 'yes& ...more  
Comment by uranicynic on May 02, 2012 4:40pm
Just thought it was time to remind everyone of First Uranium's own words about the votes. This was culled from that infamous new release back in early March announcing the asset sales. Each of the AGA Transaction and the  Gold One Transaction will be considered separately by shareholders of the Company at a Special Meeting which the Company anticipates will be held in mid May, 2012.& ...more  
The Market Update
{{currentVideo.title}} {{currentVideo.relativeTime}}
< Previous bulletin
Next bulletin >

At the Bell logo
A daily snapshot of everything
from market open to close.

{{currentVideo.companyName}}
{{currentVideo.intervieweeName}}{{currentVideo.intervieweeTitle}}
< Previous
Next >
Dealroom for high-potential pre-IPO opportunities