> Section 19 is broken, in that it attempts to contradict
> reality. Neither section 19 nor the issue that created it
> did anything to deal directly with shares already in the
> possession of non-shareholders.
"Reality" is that Primo Corp shares are fictitious, and none of us own
any. They're defined entirely by section 19, and so if section 19
says I don't have any, then I don't have any.
Either way it's a moot point, unless root at some point becomes a
Shareholder, in which case e has 1 more share than e would otherwise.
BobTHJ
