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.
Thanks for the update!
As far as I am aware, they have done it. But 1) OTC Markets is slow about everything, and especially about CE removal, and 2) I might be missing something.
I do so enjoy a clear agenda.
A few years down the road. They're not going to be in a rush to sell those before the business has matured.
That was always obvious, LOL.
Wasn't there a tweet last December about how the merger would be very fast and everything would be very different? I guess that was hyperbole.
Or there's a deal to buy the shares that hasn't actually closed yet, or the shares are actually some kind of preferred dealio... we'll find out going forward.
Probably anything further requires getting into details about the acquisitions and the contractual requirements which supposedly require an RS. Can't think why else it would require an NDA.
Thanks for sharing what you heard, though.
LOL. Someone doesn't understand how shells and reverse mergers work.
Many of us do understand that the financials are for the pre-merger shell, and that everything changes on a going forward basis.
I didn't think they had to file a quarterly for the 4th quarter. Always thought it was included in the annual. Not sure though.
It's possible you have the active and inactive documents mixed up. All the active ones I checked had signatures from 3/8. The 1/14 signatures were on the inactive documents.
Better format, get the shell detail correct, may have updated holdings, but I'm not sure. Looks pretty good to me, but I'm neither a lawyer nor an accountant.
Thank you.
Definitely. I mentioned a few times that blocking shareholders on twitter might be legally questionable.
I don't know what we can do about it though.
I guess I don't know. Maybe it's all of it. RS plus name change plus acquisitions at the tail end.
I think it's an RS discussed by social media staff not by IR, which means the language and approach is completely unclear and uninformative. But it's the RS.
I'm assuming the corporate action is the RS. Is there any other possible interpretation?
If it was this past weekend, you'd probably know about it by now.
Just for the record, was reading comments here prior to the RS, and your attitude was not what I would call positive. Which is not to say that there isn't a lot of validity to it, especially now...
If they were going to reduce they would have said so by now,
I think you're basically correct on the math, but there's some possibility that the lack of liquidity could keep buyers away. It depends on whether they (the company) provide any public awareness, etc.
Understood. I'm working off the same comments, trying to provide clarity on a point that was stated very indirectly.
They are current, and the corporate action is almost certainly the split. There's nothing else on the table that they've mentioned. So that 15:1 is probably happening.
That's not correct. RS is imminent, sounds like possibly this week...but soooon. The meeting notes said *further dilution* would probably not arise until Q4. The implication seems to be that it might be for acquisitions at that time.
It's usually on the calendar the night before it's implemented. That's actually the day of record, so if you try to sell out or buy in that day you'll technically be trading post-split shares. Which can truly screw up balances in at least etrade accounts.
Like I said, not on standard IR channels.
Don't you love it when you sell (some of) your shares because of a reverse split, and then the stock bounces because of leaked info about the future of the company that wasn't released via standard IR channels like OTC or the company twitter account?
WTFF?
Once he's done loading, LOL
Hope so.
LOL, it's all been said before. He's right, in the immediate sense, that we can't prevent it. You and everyone else are right that it's prima facie fraudulent after the documents that were voted on never mentioned an RS, and was completely unnecessary given the stock price and share structure, and that it has been incredibly destructive to shareholder value, which is supposed to be the primary concern of the public company CEO
Lying by omission is still fraud. If a RS was a necessary part of the merger, that should have been disclosed.
I can't find it anymore, so it looks like you might be right.
Clueless and young and not professional IR. Just a social media guy.
I'm pretty sure they don't. Some of those replies make no sense. Do they think we're in the middle of contract negotiations?
I don't know
The new shareholder-friendly twitter account appears to be
https://twitter.com/ClstHoldings
Just in case anyone didn't see the original tweet from the original twitter account due to being blocked.
------
The Data Source
@thedatasourceuk
Dear #shareholders, we have created a new profile for all of you. Would sincerely request you to follow the page for all the updates.
@ClstHoldings
#thedatasource #tds
7:00 AM · Feb 18, 2021·Twitter Web App
We have created a new account for TDS & CLST Holdings for Shareholders specifically. Please vote......
Keep - CLST Holdings
62.5%
Close - CLST Holdings
37.5%
-----
The Data Source
@thedatasourceuk
·
10m
Correct
-----
The Data Source
@thedatasourceuk
·
7m
If approved, it will be used for all shareholders updates, polls and to communicate. Anyone that is blocked on this one will still have access to the new one.
That thread looked promising to me. It sounds like they're taking it seriously.
I just wish they (and the lawyers) would hurry up about it.
Any news?