Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
reducing
MCM
to less than a skeleton operation could seriously
erode trust in the soundness of the
MCM
business and, as a
result, the guarantors and the bank would be forced to take ne-
cessary action to protect their security. After heated discussion,
the board resolved (with Wallace and Robertson voting against)
that six people at
MCM
's Toronto office and one in Kingston
(among them Day, Edwards, Smyth, and Wolfe) be laid off,
with the announcement being delayed until Wednesday 2 Octo-
ber, in order to determine first whether the agreement with new
investors could be reached. An additional six people were to be
let go in the second round, including Genner.
It was getting late, but Rea and Laraya were still drinking
coffee and waiting for Kutt. “It was six o'clock or so,” said Rea.
“He finally comes back and says to José and I: 'I'm sorry boys,
I've lost.' He said 'I had to sell [my] shares in the company.' …
José and I were really saddened too.”
According to the signed agreement, Kutt was to sell 100,000
of his common shares to Beverly V. Elliot for $150,000. His re-
maining shares were also taken care of in the agreement: Kutt
was to deposit all shares “which he owns from time to time
with the voting trustees [named in the document as Elliot,
Robertson, and Richard Meech, all from Borden & Elliot] by
registering such shares in their names as voting trustees and the
voting trustees have sole and absolute voting powers with re-
spect to the shares.” But that was not all. Kutt was requested to
sign a non-competition covenant, according to which he would
stay away until 30 October 1976 from any direct or indirect
business activities that could result in the manufacturing of a
computer competitive (in terms of sales price and capability)
with the
MCM
/70 or with a new computer - the
MCM
/77 - that
MCM
wanted to develop.
Finally, according to a memorandum entitled “Re: Settlement
of dispute between Merslau Kutt and Borden & Elliot” and sent
