
|
Investor
and Media Relations:
Marty
Tullio, Managing Partner
McCloud
Communications, LLC
949.553.9748
marty@mccloudcommunications.com
|
![]() |
|
|
-
|
Brandt
could not legally call a valid meeting after June 26th. He had
60 days to complete a meeting with a quorum (over 50% of shareholders
agreeing to hold a meeting), beginning with the first meeting he called on
June 22, and failed to put together a quorum in 7
attempts.
|
|
|
-
|
The
Company’s official annual meeting has been duly called by the Board of
Directors and scheduled for September 29, 2009. Since 2000
Brandt never held an annual meeting, even though it was required in the
Company’s Bylaws and requested by the Board. Nevertheless,
Brandt was now in a rush to hold a meeting 25 days before the official
meeting date set by the Board after his
dismissal.
|
|
|
-
|
This was not a legitimate
meeting. The official record date for the shareholder
meeting is August 27, 2009. The 16 million shares present at
the meeting -- which included approximately 2 million NO votes -- would
not have been enough to hold a meeting under our Delaware Charter and
Bylaws. In fact, shares voting YES for Len Brandt and his slate
of directors represented only 34.4% of the outstanding shares of the
company. Excluding Brandt’s personal holdings, shareholders
voting for him represented only 15.4% of the company. In effect, Brandt was
attempting to take control of the
Company using a minority of outstanding shares, mostly his
own.
|
|
|
In
September of 2008, Brandt received an initial financing proposal from
Laidlaw. It indicated that, in order for the pricing to be
acceptable to the market, it would need to be at $.40 per share with 100%
warrant coverage. It is a misrepresentation for Brandt to state
that now a deal could be successfully closed at
$.80.
|
|
|
In
December, Laidlaw again proposed this financing, but with two significant
new terms: 1) a requirement that a minimum of $1.0-1.5 million
in equity be raised from existing company shareholders before Laidlaw
would consider using its network to raise $1.0 million, and 2) that the
equity would need to be structured as a preferred stock investment with
many restrictive terms, including full anti-dilution
protection. In other words, the shares would be sold at $.40
per share, but could eventually be converted to common stock at a much
lower price (but never a higher
one).
|
|
|
In
January, Laidlaw did propose a Bridge Loan structure, which was
incomplete, never agreed to by either Laidlaw or CNS Response, and never
presented to CNS Response’s full Board. Yet Brandt claims it
was a legitimate financing alternative to the bridge loan executed five
months later by the Board after dismissing Brandt, while failing to
mention the anti-dilution protection clause in his
comparison. Later in January, the Bridge Loan structure is
abandoned and Laidlaw agrees to assist with the Company-sponsored equity
rights offering.
|
|
|
Finally,
in March, Laidlaw reports “no traction” on an equity offering and asks
Brandt whether he has yet received any commitments from his existing
shareholders. From the Board’s March 17th
minutes: “Mr. Brandt stated that a
financing in the near term being spearheaded by brokers is not feasible given
current market
conditions.” Meanwhile,
Brandt documents his plans to wind down the Company while soliciting new,
non-traditional sources of capital, including an extensive exchange of
term sheets with a well-known internet
spammer.
|
|
|
Conclusion: There
was no impending equity deal when Brandt was dismissed by the
Board. His shareholder materials suggest that he had better
deals than the Board approved in June and August; these are false
claims.
|
|
|
-
|
Brandt
failed to raise capital over 12 months and put the Company in a position
where it could only do a dilutive
financing; we raised capital in 60 days and the Company
survived.
|
|
|
-
|
Brandt
failed to build his team and blamed them for his failures; we’ve harnessed
the talent of our physicians and management and advanced the Company in
every area -- clinical research, product development, and
commercialization -- and the Company has
thrived.
|
|
|
-
|
We’ve
built a world-class Board of Directors with unprecedented access to
sources of funded research, and expertise in commercialization and health
policy.
|