Thanks for the comments.
Actually, I have been aware of the SEC filings, and also the rebuttal by WT. I don't swallow that rebuttal; there seems to be a very suspicious wording in the beginning of the response: "we found that none of the legal corporations used by the Governing Body in caring for the Kingdom interests own stock in Rand Cam...". This leaves a lot of other possibilities available. Perhaps ownership is vested with a corporation that isn't considered a 'legal corp'; or else a legal corporation, but it isn't used by the GB; or else it is a legal corp used by the GB but not in caring for Kingdom interests, etc.
What I appreciate about this page is that there is clearly a strong intent by the company to pursue military applications; in fact, it looks like they believe that military contracts could be the backbone of all their business. I was having difficulty finding a nice, secular, non-biased website that could clearly show that Rand Cam had clear intentions of pursuing this. Something that connected the dots easily.
I am trying to figure out what some of this paragraph from the Nov 11 2000 SEC proxy statement means:Rand Cam Engine Corp. is a privately held company whose stock is reportedly owned 50% by The Watchtower Society, a religious organization, 34% by James McCann and the balance by several other shareholders. Mr. McCann has indicated that he donated the shares held by The Watchtower Society to that organization but has retained a voting proxy for those shares. Accordingly, the beneficial ownership of the 5,367,900 shares registered in the name of Rand Energy Group Inc. can be attributed to The Watchtower Society and Mr. McCann. The Company believes it would be misleading and not provide clear disclosure to list as beneficial owners in the table the other entities and persons discussed in this paragraph, although a strict reading of Rule 13d-3 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 might require each such entity and person to be listed in the beneficial ownership table.I don't know if that is language that is regular for this type of document, or what... I don't deal with these financial things like this in my daily life...
Anyway, just in case someone wants to look at them, here are two links for the SEC and for the WT response:
http://www.infolink-net.de/images/wt-brief-rand.jpghttp://www.cultureshocksolution.org/public_html/Rand%20Cam%20Engine%20Corp.txt --please note that this document was filed by the registrant (REGI US Inc) Any other thoughts/comments?
bebu
Actually, I have been aware of the SEC filings, and also the rebuttal by WT. I don't swallow that rebuttal; there seems to be a very suspicious wording in the beginning of the response: "we found that none of the legal corporations used by the Governing Body in caring for the Kingdom interests own stock in Rand Cam...". This leaves a lot of other possibilities available. Perhaps ownership is vested with a corporation that isn't considered a 'legal corp'; or else a legal corporation, but it isn't used by the GB; or else it is a legal corp used by the GB but not in caring for Kingdom interests, etc.
What I appreciate about this page is that there is clearly a strong intent by the company to pursue military applications; in fact, it looks like they believe that military contracts could be the backbone of all their business. I was having difficulty finding a nice, secular, non-biased website that could clearly show that Rand Cam had clear intentions of pursuing this. Something that connected the dots easily.
I am trying to figure out what some of this paragraph from the Nov 11 2000 SEC proxy statement means:Rand Cam Engine Corp. is a privately held company whose stock is reportedly owned 50% by The Watchtower Society, a religious organization, 34% by James McCann and the balance by several other shareholders. Mr. McCann has indicated that he donated the shares held by The Watchtower Society to that organization but has retained a voting proxy for those shares. Accordingly, the beneficial ownership of the 5,367,900 shares registered in the name of Rand Energy Group Inc. can be attributed to The Watchtower Society and Mr. McCann. The Company believes it would be misleading and not provide clear disclosure to list as beneficial owners in the table the other entities and persons discussed in this paragraph, although a strict reading of Rule 13d-3 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 might require each such entity and person to be listed in the beneficial ownership table.I don't know if that is language that is regular for this type of document, or what... I don't deal with these financial things like this in my daily life...
Anyway, just in case someone wants to look at them, here are two links for the SEC and for the WT response:
http://www.infolink-net.de/images/wt-brief-rand.jpghttp://www.cultureshocksolution.org/public_html/Rand%20Cam%20Engine%20Corp.txt --please note that this document was filed by the registrant (REGI US Inc) Any other thoughts/comments?
bebu