InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 4
Posts 546
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 04/10/2012

Re: bigbux1 post# 7513

Sunday, 08/26/2012 1:44:09 AM

Sunday, August 26, 2012 1:44:09 AM

Post# of 71458
It may very well be that Montecito wants out because they were compensated on 24 cent/share basis, but it looks to me like the default on this promissory note has something to with the legal basis of their grievance.

Montecito Promissory Note
On May 6, 2011, in connection with our acquisition of certain assets from Montecito, we issued Montecito a subordinated promissory note in the amount of $500,000.  The subordinated promissory note is subordinated to the secured convertible notes we issued in the private placement that closed on May 5, 2011.  The Montecito Note was due in September 2011 and accrued interest at the rate of 9% per annum until maturity and accrues interest at the highest legal rate allowed since maturity since the Montecito Note is in default for failure to pay principal and interest when due.



It is ugly, and I have to assume stuff like this is a major turn-off for more than a few potential investors.

Still, there's no getting around the fact that someone with rather deep pockets is serious about making VML179 happen (and cleaning up the books in the process). Just can't imagine anyone would even contemplate throwing 8.5 mil at VML if Montecito was unamenable to dropping the case under achievable means thru financing.
Join InvestorsHub

Join the InvestorsHub Community

Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.