Saturday, June 28, 2008

Updated e-mail address for R. Campoy

A little birdy told me that he has a difference address, and he did not get the original e-mails. Not that it matters anymore given that the Nine Cent lady is still in charge (she is not quite as powerful and famous as Fiffy Cent, but hey, she is Nine Cent). Excuse my attempt at humour, but what else can you say about a $.09 stock and no action by the BOD.

Anyway, people should maybe send a copy of their original e-mail to the address below. I can't guarantee this one will work either, but it has a better chance I think. I still haven't been able to come up with the e-mail address for Mark A. Lettes so perhaps people can ask Ricardo to forward their respective e-mail to Mr. Lettes (if he doesn't mind).

rmcampoy@gmail.com

It's the same as last time, but it has an "r" in front.

5 comments:

bigjohn37 said...

Hi Production05 & everyone;
Apparently none of us attended the AGM (judging by the lack of posting of any news). So let's start thinking post AGM strategy.

Here are a few questions to ponder:
(1)As shareholders, do we have a right to the AGM minutes? If yes, how do we get them? [It would be nice to know how close we came to 50%; I wonder who provided the vote tally services; was it Computershare?]
(2)Is there any way we can get hold of the list of shareholders (even if we have to pay for that service)?
(3) Is there any way we can start a post AGM shareholders' rebellion (hopefully in 'partnership' with Wega & Scion)?

Assuming that it's PK's slate of directors who got elected, let's start a second wave of letters to the "new" BOD, expressing our dissatisfaction with the affairs of CMM (especially PK's performance, and her 'performance bonus').

I look forward to reading your ideas.

By the way, those of you in Canada: have a great Canada Day; and those of you in the US: have a great 4th of July!

Anonymous said...

I just checked CMM job opportunities. They are advertising for a chief corporate geologist who,among other duties will be responsible for long term mine planing.This position will pay more than what the VP[operation] made last year. This position will report to the VP[explorations]. Does this mean that Adrian McNutt has been thrown under the bus?

Carib said...

bigjohn27,

Based on what I've heard from the AGM, approximately 50% of the proxies were returned and of those approximately 85 million shares voted, 70% voted FOR PK and 30% voted to WITHHOLD.

End of story.

My letter to the BoD (and probably yours as well) was sent with the hope that the voting on PK would be somewhere closer to 70:30 to Withhold and they would use the vote to ask her to resign or at least give up one or both of the CEO/Chairman positions.

Organizing a rebellion to oust PK would be an exercise in futility. I don't know for sure, but based on the voting, I believe that Scion voted For PK and there is another large shareholder that acquired the shares the the September 2007 PP (that holds around 12 million shares) presumably also voted for PK.

The "new" BoD is the same as the "old" BoD. Two of the three independent Directors didn't get our letters, but in the end it probably didn't matter. PK had the votes either by persuasion, charm or threats.

production05 said...

Based on those numbers, it would mean that votes to WITHHOLD PK was about 25.5M (85M * 30%).

We know that blog members most likely voted in the ballpark of 11M shares to WITHHOLD, which would leave a balance of only 14.5M (25.5M - 11M) from other shareholders. Now, we know what Wega alone has way more shares than that, and most likely still had 22M at May 29'08. It's possible that Wega didn't even bother to vote all of their shares. Perhaps they have their shares in different accounts and did not bother to vote from each account, or they simply may not have received all of the AGM info on time (similar to a number of retail shareholders). It could also be that perhaps they thought they were voting with all of their votes, but maybe they needed to vote multiple times if they had various accounts. For example, when I had voted the system didn't confirm how many votes were registered for me under the sign in id I had punched in.

Anyway, it wouldn't have mattered. As mentioned, the blog voters voted around 11M (maybe) to WITHHOLD, and it seems like the balance of 14.5M was voted by Wega (only 14.5M of their 22M shares), and it looks like pretty much no one else voted to WITHHOLD.

Yup, it is quite shocking, but it appears to be the reality of the situation. For whatever the reasons, the numbers suggest that PK is well supported by the Century Mining shareholder base.

bigjohn37 said...

Apparently there were only two shareholders at the AGM! So the reward of shareholder apathy (except for the pro-active bunch of this Blog!) is more of the same for the next year. That is: PK at the helm, 9-cent share price, and maybe bankruptcy down the road, in a gold bull market! It could happen, because I'm pretty sure that Fortis has an escape clause in their agreement with CMM, and PK will find it increasingly more difficult to raise money for her upcoming misadventures. It's beyond comprehension! And so much for the "independent" members of the BOD.