What I would really like to know is when did the company make the decision that they needed an amended ESOP? The announcement was made on March 13, with an effective date of February 5. It took them 5 weeks to announce it? I have very little doubt that when they realized they didn't have enough votes, the whole thing was cooked up in consultation with their lawyer and Morrow Sodali, their solicitation firm. Backdating agreements, although not illegal, does raise ethical questions when it is quite obvious to everyone why it was backdated and the motive behind it. Wouldn't it be nice if shareholders had the same luxury of backdating their share purchases?

I know for a fact that there have been many court challenges in the past stemming from shareholders that alleged a company was stacking the deck so that they could get their way.

It should be clarified that their current ESOP amends their 2016 ESOP. The difference is that before, the ESOP consisted of options that were awarded and that would vest over a period of time. These totalled just over 27 million options exercisable at $.05 each. These were replaced with 36 million shares priced at $.039 (money wise it works out to be about the same). No exchange of money was required. Just a loan agreement, and the voting authorization to Mordechai Bignitz.

As far as I'm concerned the company is walking on thin ice, and they better be careful.