Lorris,
What an excellent letter and response. I am so curious to find out all the details about Rand Cam and what the heck was going on with the shares, but I can (barely) wait.
But I do hope that he does find peace, too.
bebu
Hate to bring up Rand Cam again but something interesting I found...
by BONEZZ 29 Replies latest watchtower scandals
-
-
Gerard
It looks like John Robertson already had a rumble with James McCann. Hard for me to tell what the deal is. But it is safe to asume that Dale got shafted away from a portion of those $11 M:
B.C., Canada: http://www.courts.gov.bc.ca/jdb-txt/sc/96/08/s96-0871.txt
Date of Release: June 10, 1996 No. C936312
Vancouver Registry
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA
BETWEEN:
SMR INVESTMENTS LTD.
)
)
PLAINTIFF
)
)
RAND CAM ENGINE CORPORATION
)
)
DEFENDANTMR. JUSTICE COLLVER
Counsel for the Plaintiff: R.N. Pelletier
Counsel for the Defendant: B.G. Livingston
Place and Date of Summary Trial: Vancouver, B.C.
June 3, 1996
1 In a Rule 18A summary trial, the plaintiff, SMR
Investments Ltd. ("SMR"), seeks specific performance of a verbal
agreement by which it was to acquire from the defendant, Rand Cam
Engine Corporation ("Rand Cam"), 100,000 shares of Reg Technologies
Inc. ("Reg Tech. Inc.") for $40,000. Although $40,000 was paid by
SMR, Rand Cam has refused to deliver the shares. The trial of the
action is set for later this week, for two days.
2 James L. McCann is an inventor. On March 28, 1990,
on behalf of Rand Cam, he negotiated transfer of the right, title
and interest in the "Rand Cam-Engine" to Rand Energy Group Inc.
("Rand Energy") in consideration for the issuance to Rand Cam of
1,800,000 common shares of Rand Energy.
3 At the same time, Rand Energy issued 1,200,000 of its
common shares to Reg Tech. Inc., which resulted in Rand Cam and Reg
Tech. Inc. holding 60% and 40%, respectively, of the issued shares
of Rand Energy.
4 However, Rand Cam then agreed to sell 330,000 of its
shares in Rand Energy to Reg Tech. Inc. for $11,050,000, bringing
Reg Tech. Inc.'s interest in Rand Energy to 1,530.000 common shares
(51% of Rand Energy's shares), and leaving Rand Cam with 1,470,000
common shares (49% of Rand Energy's shares).
5 With respect to payment of the $11,050,000 for the
330,000 Rand Cam shares, the agreement (dated July 30, 1992)
between Reg Tech. Inc., Rand Cam, Rand Energy, and James McCann
required payment of $10,000 on execution, issuance of 100,000 Reg
Inc. shares to Rand Cam within 30 days, payments of $500,000 on
July 24, 1993 and July 24, 1994, and payment of the remaining
$10,000,000 in accordance with a schedule which I need not recite
in these reasons.
6 Concurrently with the above, John Robertson, President
of SMR (and also President of Reg Tech. Inc.), and James McCann, of
Rand Cam, negotiated for SMR's purchase of 100,000 shares of Reg
Tech. Inc. from Rand Cam. Their oral agreement was (at least
partially) confirmed in a July 29, 1992 letter, as follows:
Pursuant to our verbal agreement, this letter
is to confirm that SMR Investments Ltd. agrees
to purchase 100,000 treasury shares of Reg
Resources Corp. from the Rand Cam-Engine Corp.
for $40,000 within ten days after receipt of
the said shares from Reg Resources Corp.
On July 29, 1992, Reg Tech. Inc. shares were trading on the
Vancouver Stock Exchange ("VSE") at $0.47 to $0.50 per share.
7 Reg Tech. Inc. is the only public company to be
involved in the above dealings, and when it was discovered that VSE
approval of the release of the 100,000 Reg Tech. Inc. shares was
required, the July 30th, 1992 agreement was amended on April 27,
1993, providing for new payment terms, including issuance of the
mentioned 100,000 shares within 30 days after VSE approval.
8 Meanwhile, the $40,000 which SMR had agreed to pay to
Rand Cam for the Reg Tech. Inc. shares had been paid by SMR.
However, rather than delivering 100,000 Reg Tech. Inc. shares to
SMR, Rand Cam returned the $40,000 to SMR on September 27, 1993.
On that date, Reg Tech. Inc. shares were trading at $2.76 to $2.98.
9 SMR's action against Rand Cam is for: a declaration
that Rand Cam holds 100,000 Reg Tech. Inc. shares in trust for SMR;
an order transferring the shares to SMR; an injunction restraining
Rand Cam from dealing with the shares; specific performance; and,
in the alternative, damages either in lieu of specific performance
or for breach of contract.
10 Rand Cam's pleadings, prepared and filed by James
McCann, are difficult to fathom, but Mr. McCann's affidavits, filed
in response to this application, fairly explain his position.
11 Essentially, Mr. McCann contends that SMR agreed to
purchase 100,000 Reg Tech. Inc. shares from Rand Cam for $40,000
only if the Reg Tech. Inc. shares were then trading on the VSE at
less than $0.40 per share. Emphasizing that Rand Cam would not
have agreed to sell unless the sale was completed by August 30,
1992, Mr. McCann deposed as follows:
13. It makes no sense for Rand to enter into
such an agreement with Reg, if upon receipt of
the shares from Reg, the trading price of Reg
shares on the Vancouver Stock Exchange was in
excess of $0.40 cents per share. My clear
understanding of my verbal agreements with
John Robertson, on behalf of Reg and SMR, in
July, 1992, was that in the event the share
price of Reg was greater than $0.40 cents,
upon the issuance of the subject 100,000
shares, that Rand would then be at liberty to
sell the Reg shares on the Vancouver Stock
Exchange for a price in excess of $0.40 cents
per share.
He continued:
14. In effect, the letter of July 29, 1992,
set out as Exhibit "B" to this Affidavit is
the "Guarantee" of SMR that it will purchase
the 100,000 shares of Reg from Rand for a
price of $0.40 cents per share, if the trading
price of Reg shares was below that price at
the time of issuance of the shares to Rand on
or before August 30, 1992.
12 However, counsel for SMR submits that the "letter
agreement" of July 29, 1992 is a valid and enforceable contract,
drafted in clear and unambiguous terms, and he argues that Rand Cam
cannot now proffer evidence purporting to establish "a contractual
agreement which fundamentally contradicts the written agreement".
13 Aside from the admissibility issue, counsel for SMR
further contends that if the parties had intended that SMR would
have to pay market price for the shares, but not less than $0.40,
that could easily have been addressed in the written agreement.
Furthermore, evidence which Rand Cam intends to adduce at trial
seems to be contradicted by Mr. McCann's acknowledgement of SMR's
November 10, 1992, payment of $10,000 "as part payment on 100,000
treasury shares of Reg. Resources Corp." In this regard, I note
that on that date, Reg Tech. Inc. was trading at between $0.57 and
$0.59, although John Robertson deposes "the share price of Reg
fluctuated dramatically between $1.00 and $1.75". I do not know
where Mr. Robertson's figures come from.
14 When faced with conflicting affidavits, simply
preferring one version of events to another would lead to an
improper resolution of a summary trial application: Inspiration
Management Ltd. v. McDermid St. Lawrence Ltd. (1989), 36 B.C.L.R.
(2d) 202 at 212 (C.A.).
15 Although Mr. Roberston marshalls the more persuasive
argument, I do not accept his counsel's submission that, by itself,
the mentioned letter of July 29, 1992 is "a valid and enforceable
agreement". At most, it purports to confirm what Mr. Robertson
and Mr. McCann earlier agreed to, and that is anything but clear.
16 Until both Mr. Robertson and Mr. McCann have been
challenged in cross-examination, neither version of events can
convincingly prevail, and this is not a matter which can be
summarily determined.
"Collver J."SMR Investments LTD. (John Robertson, President)
-
Gerard
Reg Technologies Inc. Announces Completion of Private Placement of 1,000,000 Units
Wednesday October 15, 5:26 pm ETVANCOUVER, British Columbia--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Oct. 15, 2003--Reg Technologies, Inc. (TSX VENTURE: RRE - News ) announces pursuant to its News Releases dated August 7, 2003, whereby the Company disclosed that it had arranged a private placement of an aggregate of 1,000,000 units in the capital stock of the Company to various investors at a price of $0.15 per unit, the Company is pleased to announce that it has now received regulatory acceptance of the private placement. Each unit consists of one common share and one warrant (the "Warrant") enabling the investor to purchase an additional share at an exercise price of $0.20 per share in the first year expiring September 22, 2004 or $0.25 per share in the second year expiring September 22, 2005. The common shares forming part of the units are subject to a hold period expiring 12 months from the date of issuance for the units, which hold period expires October 10, 2004.
The private placement proceeds received by the Company will be used for the completion of testing and building of additional Rand Cam(TM) air pumps for several fuel cell applications and for the testing of the air compressor, for air conditioning units, for bus applications, accounts payable and for general working capital. http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/031015/155991_1.html
-
observador
Bonezz,
thanks for bring this up. Don't apologize for it. I once took a training where we learned that when working as a team, every little tiny bit of info may help to compose the final puzzle's picture.
We may have a big deal here.
Wouldn't it be nice to have this guy posting here with us? Lorris, why don't you suggest him to join the board?
Thanks everyone.
Observador.
-
Loris
I have suggested that he join us here. Who knows he just may be lurking. He needs to experience the joys of freedom, too.
Loris
-
Sharpshooter
I tried to sign in awhile back and JW.com didn't have my account. I lost interest in this forum before because nothing technical was ever discussed. Just JW bashing.
Any way about the Rand Cam Engine (RCE). My friend Jim thought the end of the world was gonna come in 1992 so he wanted to sell out the engine and spend the money. He made a lot of promises but never delivered. He promised lots of $$$ but where is it. I never got any and the Society never got any. Jim started out as a Catholic and converted to Jehovah's Witness so he actually designed this invention when he was Catholic. Shouldn't you do Catholic bashing as well?
The point that I want to make on this subject is how far does an inventors responsibility go? The RCE hasn't worked in any commercial or military incarnation. The RCE has so much potential for the advancement of 'Mankind' especially if it can attain the promised 280 mpg as promised by Jim. The version that Radian made has worse fuel mileage than a piston engine so what is the point of manufacturing it.
When Nicola Tesla invented the electric motor did anyone bash him because of the military uses of that motor. The world shit on Tesla and he died pennyless. Like I claim to know the solution to make the RCE get the 280 mpg but why should I share that knowledge with the world? The patent has run out on the RCE anyways, I can invent my own internal combustion engine, but what will it be used for? How can I do things differently to provide this to the 'World' and not get shit on?
I am only doing this for entertainment value. It is nice to be semi-retired. If anyone has questions email them to me, as I don't lurk that much anymore.
sharpshooter
ps
I will only answer emails that can tell me what sharpshooter stands for.....I want to see if there are any intelligent bashers out there....hehehe
-
-
Gerard
I lost interest in this forum before because nothing technical was ever discussed. Just JW bashing.
Some people call it healing and researching.
The point that I want to make on this subject is how far does an inventors responsibility go?
The issue is not whether JWs designed a [reliable] engine or decline responsibility for its performance, but retaining its title and rights after the engine started being used by the US Navy, because you know that performing bussiness with the Department of defense is forbiden by the WT.
The RCE hasn't worked in any commercial or military incarnation.
Sharpshooter, I am very surprised you have not followed the developments of the RCE since Jim Mccann took off on you. In summary:
- Rand Energy Group, Inc. owns the RC? technology worldwide rights exclusive U.S. since 1992, whereas REGI owns the U.S.A. rights to the RC? technology and its variations.
- In December 6 th 2001, REGI, U.S. announced that a $850,000 U.S. Navy contract, topic# N01-144 ( contract # N00014-01-M-0208 ) had been awarded to Advanced Ceramics Research prime contractor , and REGI to build and test a Naval 0.5 horsepower ceramic engine which would allow for low radar signature and high temperature operation. This new motor is being developed for powering the U.S. Navy's new Smart War-fighter Array of Re-configurable Modules "SWARM", now renamed Silver Fox , a low cost unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV).
But read all about it at http://www.geocities.com/wtgreed/diagram.jpg
In fact, the Rand Cam engine technology is currently being used by The US Navy, mounted on the Silver Fox UAV (Formerly called SWARM). It was actualy used in the Gulf War II:
http://www.geocities.com/wtgreed/SWARM_UAV.jpg
In April 8th 2003, the Navy's Office of Naval Research (ONR) had a press release stating that the SWARM had been renamed Silver Fox and was being deployed to aid marine corps in Operation Iraqi Freedom. Observers said the drones for the most part performed well on the battle field:
http://www.onr.navy.mil/media/release_display.asp?ID=137 The Navy's Office of Naval Research (ONR) press release 4/8/2003:SWARM
being deployed to aid marine corps in Operation Iraqi Freedom under a new operational name: The Silver Fox .http://www.auvsi.org/iraq/index.cfm]
AUVSI reports that at least eleven types of UAVs were committed to Operation Iraqi Freedom. One of them is the Silver Fox (SWARM) bearing REGI's (Rand Cam) engine.
http://www.webdesk.com/silver-fox-uav/
"Silver Fox UAV: Ready for the hunt."
"We sent an ONR team into the theater to deploy the Silver Fox following its transition from the original design" (SWARM). "It's now being tasked to help our Marines on the ground."
http://www.wired.com/news/conflict/0,2100,58173,00.html
Drones See, Smell Evil From Above
"It isn't the only tactical UAV slated for testing during the second Gulf War."
"If you could design a little weapon that weighs half a pound the drone could become more than a mere observer. The Silver Fox could become a robotic fighter, dealing pain from 500 feet."
http://dsc.discovery.com/news/briefs/20030407/plane.html
Discovery Channel:
"Eight Silver Foxes currently are receiving heavy use on the battlefield, and none has been shot down yet."
http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,54728,00.html
".based on a humble spy plane originally used for tracking whales at sea -- researchers are attempting to make this science-fiction scenario a reality. The project has an annual budget of roughly $6 million. [.] These machines would be capable of independently handling events in a hostile combat zone, such as surveillance, strike and even capture and detention."
Senator John McCain (Arizona)
http://mccain.senate.gov/index.cfm?fuseaction=Newscenter.Viewpork&Content_id=1070
There are nine UAV systems currently deployed and in extensive use in Iraq. The Army's Shadow, Hunter, and Pointer; the Marine Corps' Pioneer and Dragon Eye; the Air Force's Global Hawk, Predator and the Force Protection Surveillance System; and, the Navy's Silver Fox.
Ninety Silver Fox systems were deployed for Operation Iraqi Freedom with great success. Additional resources should be afforded to the unmanned aerial vehicle programs.Senator John Warner (Virginia) Chairman of the Armed Services Committee
http://warner.senate.gov/pressoffice/pressreleases/20030509.htm
The subcommittee's main focus was on enhancing the Department's capability to combat terrorism both at home and abroad and to provide for a robust homeland defense. In these areas, the committee increased the President's budget request by over $400.0 million. Specifically, the subcommittee:- Authorized a 25% increase in unmanned systems.
- Added $135.0 million to rapidly accelerate the development and acquisition of unmanned systems including $8.0 million for the Silver Fox.
- Authorized a program to coordinate technology efforts and provide for the efficient utilization of bandwidth for unmanned systems .
And it is also being tested as the power source of the Dragon Warrior Helicopter (UAV): http://www.geocities.com/wtgreed/dragonwarrior.jpg
The RCE has so much potential for the advancement of 'Mankind' especially if it can attain the promised 280 mpg as promised by Jim. The version that Radian made has worse fuel mileage than a piston engine so what is the point of manufacturing it.
I agree in that it has high reliability (few moving parts), low power / weight ratio and cleaner exhaust gases.
But you mention RADIAN, do you know what are their products used for?: " Radian offers its Military Parts Reinvention Network to reinvent, manufacture, and deliver perfect quality parts for weapon systems that fly, steam, or roll."
Like I claim to know the solution to make the RCE get the 280 mpg but why should I share that knowledge with the world? The patent has run out on the RCE anyways, I can invent my own internal combustion engine, but what will it be used for? How can I do things differently to provide this to the 'World' and not get shit on?
I am sure you have the brains and initiative and you may want to pursue the lawsuit regarding its intelectual rights. I'd like to discuss the RCE specs for my home-built ultralight project with you but in this forum the topic was brough up because the WT seemingly had possession of -donated- shares for about 16 years, knowing from the beguining that the engine was being marketed by REGI to the US Department of Defense.
ps I will only answer emails that can tell me what sharpshooter stands for.....I want to see if there are any intelligent bashers out there....hehehe >>>sharpshooter
Sharpshooter: Someone skilled in shooting; a crack shot; a dead shot; a sniper...etc. But of course there is also the world-famous " glassy-winged sharpshooter " bug Homalodisca coagulata.
Please hang around and feel comfortable verifying quotes and issues posted on various topics of this forum
*** Watchtower August 15, 1950 p. 263 Name and Purpose of The Watchtower ***
?The Watchtower? invites careful and critical examination of its contents in the light of the Scriptures*** The Truth That Leads to Eternal Life 1968 p.13 Why It Is Wise to Examine Your Religion ***
4 Jesus reproved those persons who claimed to serve God but who relied heavily on the traditions of men in preference to God's Word. He applied to them God's own words from Isaiah 29:13, saying: "It is in vain that they keep worshiping me, because they teach commands of men as doctrines." (Matthew 15:9) Since we do not want our worship to be in vain, it is important for each one of us to examine his religion. 5 We need to examine, not only what we personally believe, but also what is taught by any religious organization with which we may be associated. Are its teachings in full harmony with God's Word, or are they based on the traditions of men? If we are lovers of the truth, there is nothing to fear from such an examination. It should be the sincere desire of every one of us to learn what God's will is for us, and then to do it.-John 8:32.*** Awake! October 22, 1973 p. 6 Examine the Evidence ***
Reasonable persons agree that the only fair method is to examine the evidence on both sides, both for and against a disputed theory. That is how one arrives at the truth. -
Gerard
( Regarding your posting about dreams, take a look at this article):
Understanding Watchtower Phobias
How and Why the Watchtower Uses Fear to Control Its Members
by Randall Watters Nothing is so much to be feared as fear.
Henry David Thoreau 1817-1862phobia. [Gr. phobos, fear.] any persistent, irrational, and excessive fear of some particular thing or situation. (Webster's New Universal Unabridged Dictionary, 1983)
People who have struggled with phobias understand how immune such phobias can be to logical analysis. Like the recurrent nightmare of fleeing a hideous monster, it never seems to sink in that monsters don't exist. The irrational fears continue to plague the victim. http://www.freeminds.org/psych/phobias.htmOr look at the useful articles listed at : http://www.freeminds.org/psych/psych.htm
Cheers,
Gerry
-
deddaisy
"Any way about the Rand Cam Engine (RCE). My friend Jim thought the end of the world was gonna come in 1992 so he wanted to sell out the engine and spend the money." ---------sharpshooter
gee, your friend Jim sounds like a rational Christian kind-of guy......
"He made a lot of promises but never delivered. He promised lots of $$$ but where is it."-------------sharpshooter
gee, your friend Jim sounds like a rational Christian kind-of guy, maybe you should be a JW like him......
"I never got any and the Society never got any."------sharpshooter
gee, your friend, the Society, and you, sound like you have your hearts in the right place....
"Jim started out as a Catholic and converted to Jehovah's Witness so he actually designed this invention when he was Catholic. Shouldn't you do Catholic bashing as well?"--------sharpshooter
why bother when the JWs do it so well ?
The point that I want to make on this subject is how far does an inventors responsibility go? The RCE hasn't worked in any commercial or military incarnation."---------sharpshooter
obviously if the Society's name is involved there is absolutely no responsibility. what RCE ?
"The RCE has so much potential for the advancement of 'Mankind' especially if it can attain the promised 280 mpg as promised by Jim."-------sharpshooter
gee, one can't help but wonder why Jehovah didn't think of the RCE ?
"I am only doing this for entertainment value."-----sharpshooter
gee, it all makes sense now........
