InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 5216
Posts 24069
Boards Moderated 5
Alias Born 09/20/2000

Re: KathyBMR post# 7235

Sunday, 03/17/2013 3:12:09 PM

Sunday, March 17, 2013 3:12:09 PM

Post# of 146837
KathyBMR, as for the structure of the acquisition…

Again, I must say this again here with SKTO…

Since we don't know 100% “what is” with SKTO, we can't really say 100% “what is not” here with SKTO.

I say this because SKTO acquiring Medical Greens ™ was done so ”without” the increasing of the Authorized Shares (AS). This means that there had to have been enough shares that were already issued and outstanding to capture securing Medical Greens ™ under SKTO. I guess the best way to explain this is to put you in the position of the primary/majority owner(s) of SKTO…

1. Would you ”not do a deal” to acquire Medical Greens ™ to keep ”all” of your shares and have ”all of nothing” very minor and not so real?

Or…

2. Would you ”do a deal” to keep ”some” of your shares to allow for Medical Greens ™ to have the controlling interest and have ”some of something” very major and very real?

Here with this logic, I believe that keeping ”some” of your shares is far better than keeping ”all” of your shares if you are the primary/majority owner(s).

Because of a few investors reaching out to the Delaware SOS to confirm that the SKTO AS is still 500 Million shares (505 Million if you include the 5 million Preferred AS that’s not issued), I would have to say that they have consummated this acquisition in the best interest of all to benefit to include their shareholders with very minimal, if any dilution. Doing it this way immediately and significantly enhances the fundamental valuation for the company since having Revenues/income.

v/r
Sterling