Filed
by the Registrant
o
|
Filed
by a Party other than the Registrant x
|
o
|
Preliminary
Proxy Statement
|
o
|
Confidential,
for Use of the Commission Only (as permitted by Rule
14a-6(e)(2))
|
o
|
Definitive
Proxy Statement
|
o
|
Definitive
Additional Materials
|
x
|
Soliciting
Material Pursuant to §240.14a-12
|
CLST
HOLDINGS, INC.
|
(Name
of Registrant as Specified In Its Charter)
|
|
Timothy
S. Durham
Manoj
Rajegowda
Robert
A. Kaiser
MC
Investment Partners, LLC
|
(Name
of Person(s) Filing Proxy Statement, if other than the
Registrant)
|
|
x
|
No
fee required.
|
|
|
|
|
o
|
Fee
computed on table below per Exchange Act Rules 14a-6(i)(1) and
0-11.
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
Title
of each class of securities to which transaction applies:
N/A
|
|
(2)
|
Aggregate
number of securities to which transaction applies:
N/A
|
|
(3)
|
Per
unit price or other underlying value of transaction computed pursuant
to
Exchange Act Rule
|
|
|
0-11
(set forth the amount on which the filing fee is calculated and state
how
it was determined):
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
(4)
|
Proposed
maximum aggregate value of transaction: N/A
|
|
(5)
|
Total
fee paid: N/A
|
|
|
|
o
|
Fee
paid previously with preliminary materials.
|
|
|
|
|
o
|
Check
box if any part of the fee is offset as provided by Exchange Act
Rule
0-11(a)(2) and identify the
|
|
filing
for which the offsetting fee was paid previously. Identify the previous
filing by registration statement number,
|
||
or
the Form or Schedule and the date of its filing:
|
||
|
|
|
(1)
|
Amount
previously paid: N/A
|
|
(2)
|
Form,
Schedule or Registration Statement No.: N/A
|
|
(3)
|
Filing
party: N/A
|
|
(4)
|
Date
Filed: N/A
|
1)
|
Three
fundamental business issues face the Company as it tries to return
the
maximum value to stockholders:
|
a)
|
Reducing
Expenses - each $200,000 in expense reduction is worth 0.01 per
share.
|
b)
|
Liability
Limitation - again, each $200,000 in liability limitation is worth
$ 0.01
per share. There are going to be tough negotiations over the asset
sale
hold backs.
|
c)
|
Asset
Maximization - obtaining the highest value for the remaining
assets
|
2)
|
Durham’s
nominees are best prepared to do this
job:
|
a)
|
Kaiser
knows more about the business, the contracts and the remaining
assets that
anyone else
|
1.
|
Outstanding
note from Julian - RAK has only relationship - $500,000 -
$600,000
|
2.
|
Peru
Note $100,000 - RAK has only
relationship
|
3.
|
Escrow
- Mexico - RAK has only relationship, negotiated
deal
|
4.
|
Brightpoint
- Indemnity Challenge likely - RAK and Durham have only relationship
-
$18,000,000 at risk
|
b)
|
All
three nominees will gain substantially from distributions to stockholders,
thus aligning their interests directly with
stockholders
|
3)
|
Management’s
nominees have not proven themselves good at this
process
|
a)
|
They
have not acted to date until we’ve sued
them
|
b)
|
Estimates
of distributions continue to drop
|
c)
|
Likely
an example of not knowing the business. This does not bode well
for
negotiations with asset/business Purchasers over the purchase price
hold
backs.
|
d)
|
Kesler
is being paid $300 an hour for work that Durham nominees would
do for
free. 1000 hours for the period from April though the end of service
is
1.5 cents per share ( and likely more than the cost of the proxy
fight.)
|
e)
|
Employee
head count seems high
|
f)
|
Management
nominees benefit from fees, since they have little invested in
the
company. Prolonging the process benefits them more than high
distributions.
|