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.
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.
Thats great.
He owns 5,141,831 shares of Common Stock?? Thats insane, more than S. Or am I mistaken something.
He said he owns shares, he neither bought or sold since the deal 2015 from what I understood. But I could be wrong also.
:/ What the heck Solomon, who is advising him to do these strange things. This has nothing to do with volumes, I also saw there analysis about volume, just solve the problem instead of inventing micromanaging actions.
Choose one,
Pay back the toxic loan
Divident
Buyback
Does he have zero self critic ? Blaming low volume is ridiculous. 95% down becouse of low volume.
Swede, could you share what was said in your latest talk with S. Anything about the timeframe of loan, I got January as an estimate. Anything that could be of value to understand what is going on between FD and SIAF. Anything about colladaral shares, you said he now agree that they are beeing sold.
Just added 4000 shares, another 7500 planed this month.
Hand how do you manage to keep every singel post positive when trading at below 1 dollar and you have been a logn term investor. Please elaborate, i am slightly optimistic but also frustrated.
Lets say like this, with a stock that is trading at 3% of booked value, you don't have to be a genius to come up with an deal that will benefit the pps, FD and maybe even the growth of the company.
We just need trust from the market to unlock alot of value, trust must not be expansive.
For eg, just S removing his A shares will unlock alot of value and doesnt cost anything. We could even give him 1m shares and I think still the shareholders would be glad. I prefer to have 1m more outstanding shares compare to having the A shares.
I don't think the wording mean to much. He has to, as a CEO, claim that he is happy with the deal. He would never make a deal and publically say thay he is not happy with it, even if he is not happy.
But I think Solomon has the leverage that FD is "trapped" in the agreement that he doesnt like, to convert at 10 dollar is not amazing contract consider pps of less than 1 dollar. He needs more than 1000% pps increase.
Also I think Solomon is little desparate, but he will not agree on anything becouse he knows he has the megaloan. So S knows we are not depended on a new deal with FD, but he could use the new deal to quick solve some problem, eg. colladaral shares in order to get even more pps triggers for eg.
And what I mean about new format, is not that they just change some details in the current agreement, but instead a complete new way of working with S. It might not even be convertible loan, it could be any type of partnership. My understanding was that he felt like the current way did not work as he initially intended.
I'm trying to get more information om what will happen after the loan is retired,
I talked to FD several months ago so things might have changed becouse that was during their initial discussions. But by then FD wanted to have a new format, he acted professional and did not talk about any details so I dont know what it was. My feeling was that it was smth which would be approciated by shareholders. He also mentioned that it was easier to nego with S since he was little desperate and frustrated.
For me this should mean that S is more flexible to agree on changes that he might not prefer, such as A shares is my best guess. Maybe that FD gets to be in the board, maybe he gets to choose some ppl in management team.
I see no reason to not be optimistic about this, the only thing that worry me is if smth happend during the negotiation and what S is refering to is a complete exit from FD. But this is not the likely scenario IMO.
Im not sure what u mean, FD owns shares in SIAF
He said so, why do he need to report. It mught be less than 5%
Yes I understand, still dont really see how, they then have to bet that they manage to scare more people to sell compare to create more buyers that find the stock cheap.
It doesn't sound that easy. But IDK, could be.
Happy new year everyone, see you 2018.
I just dont want people here to assume that we will have someone buying 5 000 000 shares.
i honestly don't care if they sold, traded, nothing have happend, don't give back, give back.
Ther is four outcomes and all is fine with me.
1. Nothing have happend, everything is fine
2. They have traded our stocks, sold an bought, ok fine, will be solved once we pay back
3. They sold the sold the shares and don't want to give them back. Oki fine, we give them no money, both breach contract
4. They sold and want to give back, HURRA I'M A MILLIONAIRE
There might a 5th that I hope doesn't happen
5. Solomon pay back all at once, the lender doesn't give back the sahres and we are forced into sue them
Yes agree, if that's the scenario.
I personally just have little hard to wrap my head around that.
Because if they buy and sell it's a 0 sum game and it should be hard to impact the price this much IMO. But as I said, I no knowledge in trading, shorting and scamming :)
Neither you, me or Solomon know if the loan is toxic or not.
I just said IF it is, then you better not trust the lender.
You are just the opposite of Zerohedge.
To trust someone that scammed SIAF by givin them toxic loans (if it's true) is just completely crazy.
The chance that someone starts to buyback 5 000 000 shares when SIAF pay back the loan is not likely. I hope, I really hope, but cmon, be realistic.
I think that anyone claiming that IF they sold shares, there is still no chance they will not return the shares, just doesn't know how b2b works.
As RD say, the lender would then bet on that SIAF would never take it to court, which is more or less a very safe bet.
But again, im not talking about paying back the loan an not getting shares, im talking about neither pay back the loan or get back shares.
If SIAF is not crazy and try to pay it all at once, ofc then they force themselves into the court if they dont get the shares.
Maybe the lender is not a serious company. Consider IF they have sold the shares, in other words they have giving SIAF a toxic loan, I think definitely we should not trust them in any aspect. i wouldn't trust that they give back the loan if they consider they need to spend more on buying back then they will get.
but ofc it's only speculation because there is no proof that they have been sold yet.
I hope they are smart enough to not pay back the compelete loan at once, in order to see if they get back shares.
For eg. pay it back during 4 months, 1/4 each month. If they don't get shares they stop paying, simple.
For me that would be fine for me. Maybe not optimal but fair enough.
Yes there might be an actionplan over a time to make sure we trade at highter pps before giving away the A shares so that angry shareholders will not throw him out of the window :)
Agree 100%
I have no clue, I was speculating it might be megaloan, or maybe the one Triway had in the summer. But IDK what the really meant.
Yes he owns alot of shares privat, yes he has a converible loan.
He wants the best for himself, but the best for him is the best for us. SIAF trading at PE10.
With pps 3% of booked value any new might function as a trigger.
But why are you guys assuming the deal to be bad, maybe the desparate S has accepted to give away his A shares. With FD as a board member. Maybe he have convinced him to fire Dan.
Or FD will in a one or another way help us out from the toxic deal.
FD is gonna want to do smth we love in the deal, becouse he wants the pps to go up, cuz he owns shares in the company privat. Remember last time when forcing S to stop paying with shares.
Yes it would be bad if they are planning on just paying back the loan and not replace it with something new, I think it will be replaced. And my feeling is that it's gonna be something good.
I don't want to speculate to much but I cannot, as RD, not think about that maybe the new ageement will remove the A shares. I don't think it would be completely unlikley.
Below is referring to the deal with FD.
"Without having this subject litigated in the public forum, what I will say is that the situation has become one of negotiating an early retirement of the loan; one that will serve the better interest of the Company and hopefully rests well with the lender. The matter is complex and is steadily progressing between both parties. We will inform the market once all formalities are final and no further amendments are necessary."
But they also mentioned paying back the toxic loan earlier.
"In light of the fact that the Company does not look toward this method of financing as the optimal or cheapest means of obtaining credit, it does continue to pursue, and already has garnered more conventional means of financing to cover its ever-growing business.
It’s my view that the outstanding balances owed on the above debt will be repaid through more conventional means in the not-too-distant future, hopefully relieving us from the constant insinuation that it’s because of collateral shares that the share price is dropping, and secondly, that short-traders are no longer able to rely on the negative sentiment assumed by you and other shareholders that provides them every opportunity to successfully apply downward pressure on the market. "
They also commented if the breached the contract with the toxic lender.
" The Company is obligated to report any notice of default as a material event, and will do so, if ever one were to occur. All outstanding debt will be repaid according to the terms of each individual contract by the respective due date, stipulated."
The toxic loans will also be paid back earlier, but thats a different topic.
The discussion was initiated by FD in stockholm and it is not a requirement from the megaloan as far as I know. It was initiated becouse the pps was very low, trust on market bad, and s megaloan in sight.
FD wanted to change the format of the first loan to what I guess a way to get more infuence,to not sit on side watching Solomon detroy the shareholder value. Solomon started to be more desperate forcing him to listen to other ppl except from his inner ego voice.
I don't think we should see this as something negative, I think this will be one out of many triggers until summer 2018.
Remember that he has never been interested in lend just to get the interest of 9%, he want to exactly as we do, get the 10x becouse he belive that the company is very undevalued. If he gets very rich and I get kind of rich, thats fine for me if he supported to get there.
The new deal was also partly triggered by S deperation of low pps but also the opporunities with the new loan. Solomon is not going to be to desperate, if he knows 99% that the mega loan is settled he will not make a bad deal with FD.
There is still the possibility that the dd't find a new agreement and this is just a way for FD to exit, even though I found that unlikley. But yet to see, I have asked the question to Solomon.
FD is pref looking for a new setup, he don't like they way this deal was made in the first place. The reason I understood was that solomon can do whatever he wants now and more or less is not following the agreement. A new setup was what was discussed 2-3 months ago between FD and Solomon that I know. I don't know if this has changed over the time since the only update in the subject is the email i posted from Solomon whixh is less than a week old.
Also remember that he owns alot of shares in the company.
You also don't do anything for free, but I can trust you if you were to influence the company becouse we have the same interest as me, getting a higher pps. As long as the deal is in a way where FD benefits from higher pps it is IMO most likley to be good for SIAF.
Other way around goes for toxic lender that want to get 3,5% interest and your stocks and don't care at all if the pps is 1 dollar or 10, or even worst case, benefit when pps decline.
Email from Solomon
"Without having this subject litigated in the public forum, what I will say is that the situation has become one of negotiating an early retirement of the loan; one that will serve the better interest of the Company and hopefully rests well with the lender. The matter is complex and is steadily progressing between both parties. We will inform the market once all formalities are final and no further amendments are necessary."
They have settled a agreement to retire the loan from FD. More details will be published "soon"
The loan between FD and SIAF will be retired soon, there is a deal between them. I think it will be replaced with something new.
The truth is that when S is doing what FD told him we trade at 10 dollar and when he is not we trade at below 1 dollar.
I also have a feeling that the new deal will be performance based. So S will get money when he does what is commited, becouse FD learned that giving S money and then hope he follow what was commited doesnt work. Then he starts doing his crazy things again, eg. taking toxic loans.
SIAF have this guy by the balls becouse he sits on a very bad deal with SIAF currently. So I hope that Solomon is rational with the new deal.
I think only having his interest in the company is worth money. But ofc it can not be at any price. Im convinced that the purpose of the deal will be to increase the pps. Thats where they will find common ground.
It is also when S is weak he listen to other ppl and I trust that FD understands what the market is looking for.