"No he did'n't say IPO". "I asked him that question and he said that PSS said "going public". So Wilma, do you mean to tell me that companies can not "go public" by using a reverse merger? What I am trying to say is this. Most everyday people whom do not trade in the markets (including writers) do not know what a reverse merger is. Most people know what an IPO is.....so when PSS stated he would be taking Nant "public".....the writer relayed that to the public as an IPO. These were the words of the writer, not Dr. Shiong. If Shiong had stated in the Forbes magazine article he planned on taking Nant public with a reverse merger, using a shell he already owns....next day....knock knock... "Hello Dr. Shiong, we are indicting you on releasing insider trading information". That being said, if this was an IPO, Why didn't PSS say in the article it would be an IPO, rather than saying "going public". Was this just an oversight? I don't think so. PSS could have stated that the company would be doing an IPO, and it would not have been insider trading info.....because everyone has an equal opportunity to buy shares at the same time in an IPO. So WHY didn't PSS say "IPO" in the article? This is what you should worry about if you have no shares here, Wilma.
