Check the original prospectus on stock conversion/pricing In 2003, the employee-owners held units of beneficial interest in the Journal Employees� Stock Trust. The Grant family did not; they owned common stock. They also had certain rights under the Stock Trust Agreement that employee-owners of units did not. The proposal to employee-owners was to exchange each unit of beneficial interest for three shares of class B stock. As you recall, the proposal was approved overwhelmingly. The proposed agreement with the Grant family was disclosed and discussed as part of the company�s proposal to unitholders for the permanent capital transaction. The full text of that agreement with the Grant family shareholders was filed with the SEC. A two-page summary of the agreement was distributed with the proxy statement and prospectus dated July 23, 2003, which was the document provided in connection with the unitholders vote on the transaction. As noted this was no secret to anyone. Is it fair, who knows.
I contacted Sarah Wilkins, Journal Communications Investor Relations person. She confirmed that Bob Dye did not post the message that has been the subject of controversy on this board for the past week. Too bad. I think this message board is a really good place for company execs to spread the company point of view. By the way, Sarah Wilkins is really good. She returns calls and emails promptly and always has good answers.
Hey. What do you know! A member of management posting on this board and signing his name. Good going Bob Dye. Any of us who have made money on Journal stock under the old employee ownership program have Harry Grant to thank. Sure, in setting up the employee ownership program, Grant provided for his heirs. That's his right and I certainly don't resent the Grant heirs for their good fortune. Also, I want to repeat a message I posted several months ago. "Angelmountains" has no relationship to "benjigumm."