Subscribe to this topicForums > Sky Power Fund > Topic: Landslide
| Mar 15th 2008, 00:32 Sully Okelly |
Landslide
Edited by author Mar 15th 2008, 00:38 |
|
| Option #3 is efw clear winner im the proposed vote. The next step shall now be formulated and executed. I will update everyone on the next course of action Saturday. Thanx to all POW Shareholders :) Option #3 POW shareholders shall accommodate the merger of the Sky Hedge Fund account holders that choose to join POW of their own free will and shall jointly accept the assets and liabilities of both companies as scheduled by POW’s CEO (Sully Okelly) w/ full input from the POW Board of Directors. These shall be calculated fairly and evenly according to percentage of ownership as established by the BOD/CEO of POW. All Hedge Fund account holder linden shall be merged and shares for those funds shall be created as deemed appropriate by the BOD/CEO of POW. All of Sky’s POW shares (387500) shall redeemed first, by POW. The Board will act to protect the interests of both the existing and new POW shareholders equally, in all of its’ decisions. The trading halt on POW shall end immediately upon acceptance of this choice. This shall be chosen knowing that the net effect on POW shareholders will be least favorable financially of the 3 options and that the proposed union of the 2 firms linden will be the only major gain for POW, but that it is the most right and proper avenue for our fellow SL investors. Thank You All Sully Okelly CEO - POW |
||
| log in to reply | ||
| Mar 16th 2008, 14:29 Dalia Ahn |
Re: Landslide | |
| how is that possible? and why not post exact data for the results instaed of just saying landslide thats not rea;;y professional at all | ||
| log in to reply | ||
| Mar 16th 2008, 14:42 Pj Crosley |
Re: Landslide
Edited by author Mar 16th 2008, 14:43 |
|
| i think you guys can cut him some slack considering Pow will be back trading very soon. I didnt see many to free with your lips when Sky had this stock shut down wile he had his thumb his ass and it still remains to be there. If you guys would have realized he was a piece of shit earlier, you wouldnt have to worry about pressing Sully for some numbers right now. Be gald he steped up to help out. Im sure youll get all the legit numbers now. | ||
| log in to reply | ||
| Mar 16th 2008, 14:54 Dalia Ahn |
Re: Landslide | |
| PJ, it seems that you haven't been following this. You want us to believe that the majority of POW shareholders have voted for the option which Sully himself says "is the least favorable to pow shareholders" and yet you wants us to wait for him to gives the legit numbers. ask yourself 2 questions.. how the voting was administered and how anyone can validate that it was done accurately. I dont care about Sky and i do believe he did us all a huge disservice but i cant just be grateful cause someone stepped up to force us to accept what he said was the least favorable option just because its in his best interest. |
||
| log in to reply | ||
| Mar 16th 2008, 16:25 Sully Okelly |
Re: Landslide | |
| Hi All, I should have been exact in my post of the results. I was withholding this post until further along, but it is apparent another update is necessary. The voting was light, in lieu of the fact that I gave all week to people to vote and posted much more than I felt was necessary, in order to be as sure as possible that everyone heard, that has been interested. I can say that it was disappointing to me that so few voted, but I also felt that most were happy to accept my recommendation at this point. Being of an optimistic mind, I was sure that the POW Shareholders would take the high ground. Option #1 recieved 1 vote Option #2 recieved 1 vote Option #3 recieved 12 votes (not including mine) Dalia, I did not include your vote in these statistics, as I may have inadvertantly missed your vote. My apologies. Please feel free to have me include it. Lastly, I vote for option #3, making it 13. I believe that all parties stand to benefit with this approach. Granted, I stated clearly, that POW Shareholders would gain least by this path, That being the case if you place NO VALUE on doing what is obviously RIGHT. If POW Shareholders had accepted to recieve full market cap for their shares, it would have been wrong(400k linden wrong), underhanded and decietful gains, which I'd have ZERO part of. As it stands, POW Shareholders, in a landslide(1-1-13), chose to do what is MOST right and above reproach, from an ethical standpoint. I applaud you and will fight even harder for you as a result, if that is at all possible. Here is what each party involved has now established, the basis to move forward from: 1) POW has Chosen to stay in business. 2) POW has chosen to expand, to the degree, that thier offer is accepted by the individual hedge fund account holders. Results pending. 3) The POW .15L per share market cap(roughly) will increase substantially, thus making everyone's investment more valueable. (likely in the neighborhood of .60L per share) That is a 4 times increase in value against actual market capitalization(assets under control). 4) POW has opened it's doors to a reletively massive infusion of investment capital, which is and has been POW's mission, since long before my involvement. 5) Those that have made THIER will clear, of the hedge fund account holders, will recieve an offer to convert their ownership percentage in that fund, into shares of POW, from the assets frozen by CapEX. 6) Once those proposals are accepted/declined by the account holders, the figures will be published in a clear cut fashion here in these forums. 7) Skyranger Hammerer, who has stated that his intentions were to liquidate the hedge fund accounts, will be given an opportunity to sign off on these figures. This will ONLY be done as a courtesy to Skyranger and for a one last check of the assumptions I've been forced to make, during the accounting fiasco. "Assumptions" that mirror the 2 audits and err on the side of caution in every instance. 8) Upon completion of step #7, I will have these wishes executed by CapEX, hopefully with Sky's agreement & possibly his blessing. CapEX has offered to forego all costs to POW for transition of assets, except for the payment of the auditors, as a courtesy to it valued client POW and its' shareholders. And believe me, the work they did should have cost POW Shareholders nearly every single linden of their assets. The total for 2 independent audits was 42,500 Linden. A figure that seems WELL within acceptable limits, to say the very least. Those interested will be able to view them by asking. The following notice was posted in an effort to contact all shareholders. It was posted on the PSG Group in world. I spent hours upon hours making this group current and inviting every single current shareholder to join it, over 2 weeks ago. I have made myself available to ANYONE regarding anything to do with these proceedings. [2008/03/09 21:35] Sully Okelly: REPEAT - I have made a Major Announcement regarding YOUR company's future and it REQUIRES your VOTE and INPUT! I have posted it at http://www.slcapex.com/forums/topic/POW/1611 . So please take the 15 minutes to read it, thank you in advance, Sully Okelly - CEO - POW. I have practiced a completely open door policy even before I was duly elected to be CEO of POW, that has not changed. I, to this very moment, would like nothing more than for Sky to reconcile with his clientele and POW shareholders. That should satisfy the answer to question one, by Dalia Ahn above. As to question #2, that she posed, I have every name that voted and if necessary, I will happily ask each of them to state publicly, how they voted. I see no reason that they would hide thier light under a bushel. Just post that you desire a roll call and a count in this forum and I'll begin accommodating that request. Or e-mail me privately at michaeljsullivan@gmail.com . Lastly, I'll add, that NO VOTE was REQUIRED of meas CEO, but I CHOSE to administer one, in order keep everything above board and beyond reproach, so to speak. I have my own name to consider in all of this and have wanted to avoid confrontation and the appearance of wrong doing on anyone's part, where at all possible. This is a difficult process to have been through, while trying to keep all parties represented fairly. Thank You All Sully Okelly CEO - POW ps. thx PJ :) I knew to listen to you more, in November, but decided to give the benefit of the doubt :( |
||
| log in to reply | ||
| Mar 16th 2008, 18:38 Scott Nestler |
Re: Landslide | |
| Good Job Sully | ||
| log in to reply | ||
| Mar 16th 2008, 19:02 Sully Okelly |
Re: Landslide | |
| Thx Scott, The offers are out, 12 responses left to get answers on, then the next step. Sully |
||
| log in to reply | ||
| Mar 16th 2008, 19:03 Dalia Ahn |
Re: Landslide | |
| I still think that your responsibility is to pow shareholder Sully! advocation an option which is not in their best interest does not qualify as working for the best interest of the shareholders. I do not have the moral authority nor the evidence to chalange the results of the voting, but the results as you declared them my be a proof that its the first time in SL (and most probably RL) history that shareholders vote for an option thak will certainly loose money!!!!!! (but again there is always a first Time) the real question that you should ask yourself Sully is who won here? Pow shareholders, or the hedge fund investors... one more time you were elected as a CEO of POW not the hedge fund!!! and I think you may have overlooked that. |
||
| log in to reply | ||
| Mar 16th 2008, 19:15 Dalia Ahn |
Re: Landslide | |
| one more thing Sully. I don't need a list of who voted for what. I am not questioning your integrity, I am questioning the way you run things, and as a shareholder i have that right. I was just referring to the way the business of voting was conducted... shareholders have votes equal to the percentage each hold in a company... a 13-1-1 does not really represent the actual voting ( granted it represents how many people voted) when you administer a vote it has to be transparent..... voting through IM and emails doesn't really make it transparent and opens the doors for many to claim that their voted were not counted!!!! one of the problems that we had was how Sky acted as a CEO of the fund... Frankly I dont think the Vote issue was done in a way that would install faith in the way the company would be run in the future... you say that there is a value for doing "whats right" well that is absolutely right but not in business.... the right thing in business is to protect the rights of "Your shareholders", not the rights of the investors (you included) of a hedge fund. |
||
| log in to reply | ||
| Mar 16th 2008, 19:22 Sully Okelly |
Re: Landslide | |
| I respectfully disagree completely, with regard to your comment what is best for the shareholders. In reality, they win, win, win. They don't take funds that are truly not theirs, which could open them up to a suit(in RL), they return to active trading, which is why they own shares, and the market capitalization will go from .146 to .586 L per share immediately. The hedge fund investors will get liquidity at a smaller loss than had been published and they don't need to wait til May. Those that didn't want the merger weren't forced to accept it and they stay with Status Quo. What I've done has been creative in a really lousy situation without financially damaging anyone, if anything, people will have choices and more value all around. Sully |
||
| log in to reply | ||
1 | 