InvestorsHub Logo

LTE

Followers 7
Posts 1413
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 03/28/2009

LTE

Re: DMACS post# 2324

Thursday, 10/13/2016 1:24:11 PM

Thursday, October 13, 2016 1:24:11 PM

Post# of 6673
DMACS, one key thing to point out is ALLM's toxic debt.
For example, why should anyone trust De Liege when he
issues a press release that states that the toxic debt
was cleared:

<<January 28, 2016 13:35 ET

Alliance BioEnergy Announced Today the Payment of Short Term Convertible Notes Clearing Toxic Debt From the Books of the Company>>

http://tinyurl.com/znqp37l

However, just a few months later more toxic debt is quietly added to the
company's books:

<<On April 25, 2016, the Company entered into a 12 month convertible debenture with JMJ Financial with a principal balance of $555,556. The note carries a 10% one-time interest charge, a 10% original issue discount and a 75% warrant coverage. The note may only be paid up to 98% of the balance due within the first 180 days at a 30% premium. After 180 days, the note cannot be repaid without the holders consent. The note is convertible after 180 days at a 25% discount to the lowest trade price in the preceding 10 trading days. To obtain the note, the Company issued the investor 1,388,886 warrants with a 5 year term and a cashless exercise price equal to the lesser of $0.30 per share or the lowest trade price in the 10 preceding trading days. As of June 30, 2016, using a Black-Scholes asset pricing model, these warrants were valued at $471,303.>>

Check page 13:

http://www.otcmarkets.com/edgar/GetFilingHtml?FilingID=11542171

Why should the man be trusted? And since this toxic debt will
become convertible within two weeks from now unless it's been paid
back at a stiff penalty, that could be even more trouble for the
stock due to death spiral type of dilution.

So the big question is, did ALLM sell enough through their ongoing
private placement offering program to pay off the above debt?
A quick look at their balance sheet shows $105,842 of cash as of June 30, 2016.

Does anyone know if they found enough suckers?

I guess we'll soon find out. But judging from what they raised as
of last quarter's 10-Q, it looks like they have a lot more to raise to pay off the $555,556. Check here on page 15:

<<NOTE 11 – SUBSEQUENT EVENTS

The Company has evaluated subsequent events through the date the financial statements were available to be issued. Based on this evaluation, the Company has identified the following subsequent events:

Since July 1, 2016, the Company has sold 600,000 units for aggregate proceeds of $144,000 through its January 2016 offering.

Since July 1, 2016, the Company has issued 225,000 shares of common stock for services valued at $80,750.

Since July 1, 2016, the Company has issued an aggregate of 10,000 warrants for services. Using a Black-Scholes asset pricing model, these warrants were valued at $3,441. These warrant agreements have a term of five years (5) and an exercise price of forty-five cents ($0.45) per share.>>

http://www.otcmarkets.com/edgar/GetFilingHtml?FilingID=11542171