PZN should represent a windfall of profits in the
coming years for the lawyers. We as stockholders have
already taken a bath in this stock. The lawyers will
continue to punish present and future shareholders of this
company. Doc has opened the door to this shark feeding
frenzy. I like the idea of criminal action. It punishes
the guilty, not innocent shareholders.
A) Yes, and I would suggest that it is not
necessary for posters here to compile a list of possible
legal transgressions by PZN. The lawyers make a lot of
money and can do that research for themselves with much
more expertise, and perhaps without the lack of
clarity brought about by our moral indignation.
I don't know. I think they vary from state-to-state
of incorporation, so that's why I suggest reading
that section of the perspectus carefully. I'd be glad
to discuss this when we both have the
C) Some indians in New England might disagree, but I
D) I was right at $22 as well,
but fraud was not a part of that equation. I expected
either the dividend to be canceled, or the company to
bear the negative effects of paying it. I didn't
expect BOTH. And that is the effect of this deal if
approved- NO dividends AND dilution! We've already added
excessive and costly leverage.
Go ahead and scream if it will make you feel
better. No where on this board (or anywhere else) have I
seen CA law that allows for what the company is trying
to do in Cal City.
I live in CA, I have seen
what the unions out here have been able to do. They
have beaten EVERY single piece of legislation the
company has run out here. In fact, they are the ones that
ran the legislation PROHIBITING private companies
from importing inmates into the state.
the uncertainty (and a good dose of dishonesty) by
Crants et al, why would anyone trust what they are
saying without ANY proof?
Yes, Ive asked this
question many times. I guess I keep hoping that someone
will give me a straight answer. David Myers keeps
saying no problem - the company has put in a bid. If you
have read the BOP RFP, you would understand my
concerns. I'm just looking for an answer.
of jumping on me for asking if we have a $100
million boondoggle, why don't you either ignore my posts
or help me find the answer.
I'd also like to address the comment sometimes
made here that Doc has lost millions in this whole PZN
affair. The point is not what he has lost- that is a
matter of what he was worth to start with- but what he
stands to take away at the end, and whether those
'leftovers' are disproportionately skimmed from the remaining
equity of PZN shareholders.
And the thought does
not end with Doc. It seems this deal is made solely
to enrich (or at least to make less poor) all the
ownership of service companies and OPCO. For any deal to be
acceptable to PZN shareholders, those entities should have
their equity in the combination reduced to zero. That's
just as a starting point. Then what is needed to go
forward in terms of liquidity and how the future pie
could be split can be addressed. But, of course, that
only happens if someone is concerned with their
fiduciary responsibility to shareholders.
I'm gonna scream if you ask that question again.
How many times now...10...20...100?
Why is this so
important? Do you think you have found something that dozens
of lawyers on various payrolls have missed? Sell
your stock if this really bothers you.
I didn't hear it, but it hasn't done much for the
stock. This board was apparently down for a time, so few
messages. Did I understand that Doc will still be an
officer of this company? You mean "they" still don't get