an account of our actions from january

From December 2008, there was a activity our campaign. None of it was visible to the members of this forum or other shareholders. Simple reason for the silence was to ensure that we do not tip our strategy to the people whom we wished to defeat.

We can understand the frustration from some of the members for being silent for a long time. We had no choice in that respect.

Quite a few of the activities were carried out in an atmosphere/understanding of confidentiality. We are honour bound to respect that confidentiality. However I can give some insight into what happened at some times.

Cujo was insinuating that I lied when I informed that we had an overwhelming support. We had received multiples of 5% in support. I repeat we received more than multiples of 5% support in January 2009.

On 05-02-09 (please note this date), our emissary who knew John Ward met him in Sydney for an informal meeting to request a peaceful transformation of control of our company to our chosen Executive chairman.

The deal on the table.was: John Ward will retain his position as director and Peter Crosby will retain the CEO obviously for the reasons outlined in my previous posts titled “Why I do love Peter Crosby”.

The answer we got was that the Notice of Resolutions signed by the shareholders will be tied up in legal wrangles and by the time they were forced to call the EGM they would have called in the Administrators anyway.

To emphasise their point, on 06-02-09, trading halt was requested and granted for at 09:49 Hrs. Supposedly a safety recall affecting the company position. Incidentally the company did not apprise the market at that time or even now that particular problem (though sad it resulted in the death of a few patients) was part of the Adverse Event Rate report required by the FDA for considering the approval of the device eventually.

The failure is no worse than other earlier generation devices and of Heartmate II whose share price crashed 50% in a single day on 24-10-08 Friday. The difference in action is the difference why Thoratec’s price regained while Ventracor product which is still acclaimed as the superior product by the eminent cardiology clinicians in USA.

Thoratec swiftly called investor conference call to clarify what that recall meant. In the case of Ventracor, it took some scathing reporting by Rebecca Urban from The Australian before the bunch of highschool kids running our company gave any clarification of the situation.

Anyway after that report from the meeting and subsequent events, we had to change our strategy hurriedly. Accordingly, we had to get the lawyers prepare a legal Notice of Intent that the Ventracor cannot reject. That took time and we sent the new documents to a few of the shareholders to get the 5% and submit to the company to call the EGM. The intention was to contact rest of the shareholders individually after the Notice was served. That was achieved in three days. When we were ready to serve the Notice of Intent, true to their word, the administrators were called.

That is why we are here.

In effect we had obtained the shareholders support twice and the support was definitely overwhelming.