Reader Interaction - 22 July 2006

Questioning the Proxy Vote, Continued...



22 July 2006
EB Reader & PK Correspondence


PK,

I've reviewed past articles and unfortunately could not find the current stock distribution.

We all know the number of authorized shares increased from 50 to 150 million. What I cannot find is where those shares are.

That difference is important since it provides us with the potential overhang of shares that could be sold anytime.

If we have rule-144 stock involved, then that's great since it restricts sellers.

All the company filings show is that 15 million shares are held by warrant conversions and can be sold at any time by the shareholders. But what about the other 85 million shares?

Where did they go?


--------------------------



EB Reader

Here's the deal in regards to the authorized increase of share. The distribution is public knowledge and reported via SEC reporting criteria, but is buried (kept vague) because it allows for flexibility on the off chance that and outside entity attempts to buy out the company to suite their own agenda--through the purchase of the company's stock. It affords the management, and at the end of the day, the shareholders, protection from such an event.

In short, there is no leading intention to touch those shares in an effort to make a quick buck. That would have happened long ago, when they first increased to 50 million share--and then there were financial considerations which could have tempted them management to look hard at going that direction.

At this time, the financial consideration are low--extremely low. Not that they are a money generating entity as yet, but they are not begging for their next meal either. The company is solvent to the extent that they can afford to wait 1 or 2 years without outside support, and still move their product to market as the game plan dictates.

I know that you want more, and there is no sense in throwing the olive branch of trust at these people, you don't know them personally and their history means less due to the fact that it is merely a host of facts presented online or offered by me--and who knows what kind of agenda I have while running a website featuring of all things a little known stock company which has recently garnered a small bit of fame and recognition.

I understand your wary hesitation and interest, and do not argue against it--as a matter of fact, I tend to appreciate such thoughts because they keep me from becoming lazy, sitting upon my personal giant, watching as the scenes unfold.

There is no complaint and I encourage you to develop that line of due diligence further. I will offer my view where needed or asked--but at this point, I can offer that I have touched this matter a number of times both in the recent and distant past. I have covered the loan from Schwartz. In all instances--I saw no deception against the shareholders, though I must be honest and note that I saw no eager rush for full disclosure. This is information their legal advisors have offer advice on, and the managers at Integral are following those recommendations. That said, I do have history to base my assessments upon also, and have used that to form my filter when judging the managements next step agenda/strategy considerations.

Long email, I know, but I wanted you to understand where I am coming from also.

If you wish to develop that Due Diligence, please do. I have touched this matter a number of times in the past. I am comfortable with this outcome and sense no tricks in the works.

PK sends...