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.
0,096 now? Any news I did miss?
"We get out with no charges" - party ?
"Screwed the investors, again" - celebration?
hmm, maybe may memory associated that wrong with loan. thats why i am always try to reference.
But i do remember a 5 million request to complete production which had o be granted by the judge in November
But doesn't change the fact that the inventory is gone in January, or do you disagree with that?
Nope, they didn't have nothing, they had about 6 million of inventory at the beginning. And that is why they needed the additional loan to complete it to 10 million inventory. And it is mentioned somewhere in the November documents of the court and also in the press, that this was part of the sale agreement ( i have not the time to look it up maybe somebody can provide the reference?).
See it the other way, they sold the technology in January and kept the 10 million inventory, they build until December. That doesn't make sense to me.
And i remember some people complaining here, that they were "donating" this stuff to L3 (unfair deal, bla bla lba).
Maybe i am reading the balance sheet wrong - and i am happy if somebody would correct me.
But in their December balance sheet, they state 19 Million left
But they had to build up inventory as part of the deal since the start of bankruptcy, therefore 10 million of inventory on the sheet will go away as part of the L3 deal.
Which gives 19 - 10 = 9 Million. Then apply the january fees of all parties. Which are roughly about 2 Millions, i guess this at this point.
This means 7 Million are left. And that only if the company enters chapters 7 with a total sale of all assets to squeeze the 7 million out of it.
So the bottom line is much lower. It's about 0,085 per share, which resembles current stock price.
So maybe i did read the current stock price right - and the market hopes for a total liquidation?
The judge even mentioned, that he will turn this chapter 11 into chapter 7 if the parties will not find a settlment within due time.
Of course this is the pessimistic, no gain case. But i always like to know where i stand.
Source:
(1) Balance Sheet http://www.kccllc.net/imxacquisition/document/1612238170130000000000001
(2) Info on hearings see law360.com
They agreed to work on the 2 million with a cap in the last hearing.
Thus the clock is ticking for them.
Edit.
Means with their current burn rate, they have 6 months left. Then they run out of money.
I hope the Platinum et. al lawyers have a similar constraint.
Convertible Preferred Stock Series H confirmed
this was an open issue, if these will be converted, when i posted on the remaining money. They actually show up on the balance sheet (1) of IMSC on page 34.
Wonder if we get something of this money back?
The complete picture on the ruling of claims.
If you believe the assumption that our dear EC lawyers are cold-hearted capitalists then you have some evidence how long this is going to take.
Fact: they used about 1 million Dollars for 3 months
Fact: They estimated 2 million with a "cap" for the upcoming "battle".
Hypothesis: I do not believe in caps. They exist for deals, but they still need to make money. Therefore I use their burn rate for money: This means they (EC) calculate with a maximum of 6 months of legal fight.
This of course needs the additional assumption, that they continue with the full throttle like the last 3 months. Which I believe they will do.
But this is at least not another 12 months or more.
Thanks for pointing out!
Edit: But he judge would have the power just to stop here, afaik.
Therefore let me keep my small feeling of success :)
the only glimpse of hope is this little bit in bold . Open for interpretation. My interpretation: "It was sufficient enough evidence shown by the EC, that the judge believes it is worth to investigate further". This interpretation is as small as the outcome.
Begin of Quote:
Upon the motion (the "Motion") of the official Committee of Equity Security Holders of FIAC Corp. (f/k/a IMX Acquistion Corp), et al. (the "Committee") for leave to to file the Reply; and good cause having been shown, it is hereby ORDERED as follows:
1. The Motion is GRANTED as set forth herein.
2. The Committe may file and server the Reply.
End of Quote
http://www.kccllc.net/imxacquisition/document/1612238170130000000000003
yes. It is the kind of "better than nothing" success.
Motion granted.
Addendum: To File Reply.
smallest possible good outcome?
http://www.kccllc.net/imxacquisition/document/1612238170130000000000003
They've started uploading docs. One first interesting document:
The balance sheet of IMSC of what is left.
See Page 33- .
http://www.kccllc.net/imxacquisition/document/1612238170130000000000001
yup. that was were i put hopes into. And I was very dissapointed, that this did not lead immediatly to a decision of the judge on Friday. But that is still one the reasons why i am still here.
Small is indicted (1). But I'd like to point out not in the context of the IMSC accusations of the EC.
Source:
(1) https://www.justice.gov/usao-edny/pr/platinum-partners-founder-and-chief-investment-officer-among-five-indicted-1-billion
Why would the EC estimate 2 millions of additional fees until June, if there is no work to do?
How do you know better than the EC?
And you base your claims about the upcoming reveal of a connection between imsc and pp on what facts, can you provide your source?
Please, if it is just you guessing, then please add "i guess".
yes I believe this should be part of the work of the EC.
When they reconstruct the transactions (if my hypothesis is correct), they need to show that there is a pattern of insider trading in these transactions.
This needs to establish correlation of internal knowledge (e.g. announcements) and selling of stocks.
Tedious work though.
yes I believe this should be part of the work of the EC.
When they reconstruct the transactions, they need to show that there is a pattern of insider trading in these transactions.
This needs a correlation of internal knowledge (e.g. announcements) and selling of stocks.
Tedious work though.
Thanks "BasherCrasher" for being a calm voice of reason
I had to work a lot with lawyers in my profession, that is all what i can claim. There I had to learn, with much frustration, that common sense doesn't count for anything if you want to go through the legal system. Painful collection of evidence, and then building a good case with a lawyer which can establish links to the existing law, then the first step is done. So my main focus nowadays is always around, how can I find or create (based on existing law) good evidence. I probably sound pessimistic, also a result of how the lawyers usually talk to me.
When I read the documents of B&R, i also concluded, that they pretty good lawyers, tone and given details in there, seem to indicate that.
What drives me crazy is that there is no real indication on what real evidence they rely their claims upon, which would give me a better assessment, if they can win the case.
i believe we are still not on the same page what evidence means, when i read your email.
So I give you my hypothesis, if the case goes to a New York court on Monday and what kind of evidence the EC will use.
The EC will spend most of the 2 millions they have already predicted with the following tasks
1. The EC will reconstruct painfully every single transaction between DMRJ and IMSC which led to the final 50 Million claim of the EC.
2. Then the EC will painfully have to prove for every single transaction that this transaction was illegal at the given point in time and jurisdiction.
I am not sure if this were 10, 50 100 transactions or more.
But as the DMRJ attorney already indicated, DMRJ will fight for every single transaction - meaning that they will claim it was legal.
The sum of transactions the NY court may find illegal, will be the amount money returned (to us). This was now purely evidence based and did not need video, emails or testimony as you imply.
The only thing (hope, hope) i see how to speed this up, is they found actually a smoking gun, which means evidence in the form of email, testimony which just proves that most transactions were illegal. That would be a great shortcut.
Better attack this hypothesis, it leads to a better hypothesis
sorry whiskers53, although i acknowledge that your reasoning can be called "common sense", this will not work in any court that I know.
It would lead to lynch law, that is why the law makers built in this inconvenient "requires evidence by the accuser" for the case in question. Transfer of accusations by analogy from another case are not possible.
The currency at a court is evidence and good reasoning with the existing law.
The art of a lawyer is sometimes to make evidence look more solid than it is. But resorting to "common sense" is usually the path to losing a case.
Finally the EC explained also how they did come up with the 50 million claim in November.
"The loan agreements allowed the lenders to realize $50 million from debt-to-equity conversions that reduced the principal on the company’s debt by only $4 million". (1)
This claim of the EC will be the only source of additional money. So it needs to be proven by evidence. Unfortunatly judge Shannon only decides if there is enough probability for success for proving this claim. So if granted a (long) battle on a New York court is ahead.
Nothing else, sorry tin foil hat wearers. No criminal charges ahead for management, Harvey the invisible rabbit, aka buffalo, also did not show up at this hearing (2).
Source:
(1) https://www.law360.com/articles/885560/imx-equity-panel-denies-ch-11-sabotage-claim-by-lenders-
(2)
Ruling on the EC motion will be on monday 11am in a telephone hearing.
Parlin (on behalf of DMRJ/Montsant)
* Parlin said that in the complaint against Platinum, there were no allegations asserting ties to DMRJ or Montsant conduct.
* “The fact that somebody is committing a crime in one place does not constitute evidence that they’re committing a crime someplace else".
That is what many posters here pointed out.
There is only hope left, that the evidence the EC presented convinces the judge.
Source:
(1) https://www.law360.com/articles/885560/imx-equity-panel-denies-ch-11-sabotage-claim-by-lenders-
Whiskers53, my understanding of proof is not as outcome of a trial, but the plain "proof" as defined in a dictionary:
"evidence sufficient to establish a thing as true, or to produce belief in its truth. "
Without that, no judge will rule in favor of the EC.
agree with that deep from the heart.
We need PROOF.
Proof and proper reasoning will work in cases like that before court. At least this seems to done by the EC in their court documents. I hope that will work out.
But there are some weird conspiracy theories here. In all my frustration about what i have lost, i always find some fun in imagining those writers wearing tin foil hats while creating new unfounded and unreasonable stories without any solid facts - but hey, maybe I would do the same if i would be convinced that the government is listening all the time.
Maybe that scam was even run by the government....... ( probably it is better not to feed the trolls here :) ).
Second Hearing is on the 27th.
As pointed out in the law360 article, they did not finish on the first hearing and continue the hearing of last friday.
The EC finally gives more information in (1), which appeared today.
It appears also to explain, why the judge was not very fond of the EC in the last hearing. In his opinion they failed to provide the document (1) referenced in time.
(1)http://www.kccllc.net/imxacquisition/document/1612238170125000000000003
I am not recommending this stock. Still try to figure out how the EC will approach this, and if i should sell now or if it is worth to wait until something like miracle of 25 million would happen, which still would be a loss for me (but then one i would really like to take with a BIG LESSON learned).
Please understand that i differentiate in my mind.
I do not believe anything from both sides as a person. But an attorney is an agent of the legal system. The legal system that I know has to work with the "Presumption of innocence", which is also true for the judge:
"Under Anglo-American common law, the accused is always presumed innocent in all types of proceedings; proof is always the burden of the accuser."
(Wikipedia)
So even if common sense says guilty, you still need to work through this in the legal system, that is how i understand it.
again party time here - although probably due some clues not totally unjustified.
But what did really happen?
Well, lets start with what did not happen.
What did not happen was that the dogs of EC chased our Charden Capital guys up the tree and under the barking of the dogs they admitted that they had a more intimate relationship with Platinum.
What happened, without a visible force in the documents, the Charden guys admitted that they had dealt stocks for Platinum.
The EC "was shocked" by this, but they accepted the free lunch offered by Charden Capital and played their role very professional, by nailing it, in citing statements of Charden, where they obviously at least did not tell the whole truth.
They also made sure that they pointed out that they tried to settle things with these guys without the court, but they refused to do so.
That seems first time solid enough to me, that they really can win this particular motion battle. They also probably made a pretty good point to cast doubt on further statements of platinum partners.
The war in total is not won. But the strategy and of Platinum et al did become more obvious:
"Admit nothing until they find a smoking gun with our finger prints" (and we we cannot deny it anymore)
Speculation:
It seems also, that they are pretty sure, that they have not left a smoking gun behind, so that the EC has the tedioius job of finding circumstantial evidence, like exactly pining the way their insider trades have happend. Also they then rely on finding factual or professional mistakes in the motions of the EC.
So the longterm strategy is to play this so long until the judge loses patience (and also sees that too much money is lost), and he orders a settlement, which probably leaves them with more than 0 on their side.
What do you think?
The first real visible shot of the EC at Platinum et al.
What do you think?
http://www.kccllc.net/imxacquisition/document/1612238170124000000000005
while you are at repeating this claim, can you comment on, why they state something different there (1)? Can you provide your source of information please?
(1) https://www.law360.com/articles/883105/imx-equity-panel-offers-fee-cap-for-ch-11-lender-suit
Again i have to correct a factual mistake.
Mitchell Herr was not admitted for future involvement, he was admitted for last Fridays hearing as the sign-in sheet for Friday shows, which was released today(3).
Sigh, allowed myself to to jump to conclusions, that they are gearing up for litigation. He just joined the hearing, for what, is not really known, but as some writers pointed out you can speculate based on his resume in (2).
So if this continues remains to be seen this week.
(1) http://www.kccllc.net/imxacquisition/document/1612238170123000000000004
(2) https://www.hklaw.com/Mitchell-Herr/
(3) http://www.kccllc.net/imxacquisition/document/1612238170124000000000002
IMHO nobody disputes the fact that platinum faces criminal charges.
As other writers here have pointed out.
If one guy sets a house on fire on the other end of the city, you still need to prove that he set your house on fire.
That is law.
We have only they set the house on the other end of the street on fire.
That is where facts end
and where hope begins.
I agree with you that judge does his job, i was only opposing some comments here, saying the judge is "on our side"
by the way, The attorneys offered the cap, afaik, do you have contradicting information?
For the judge, he is doing his job, but it is somehow cynical how it works out. Basically he implies in his question, "as long as the secured creditors are secure, I will allow you to gamble with the remaining money, i don't care..."
Not sure where the people here get their facts from about the judge. Seems a lot of fantasizing/wishful thinking here. The EC made it barely to the point that the judge allowed the arguments to continue this week. And he is more concerned that the secured creditors will be affected by the attempt of the EC. Seems to me he doesn't worry about the stock holders too much. (see law360)
Quote from the judge to the EC (on Friday last week).
“You’ve been accused by these folks of gambling with their returns, with the returns of unsecured creditors, which is effectively guaranteed as I understand the math, and the returns to administrative claims and others,” Judge Shannon said. “Can you assure me that this fact pattern will not affect the stakeholders above equity in the capital structure?”
Still i wish the EC (for my own sake) the best outcome.
still wonder where DMRJ got the money from...
However the most neutral conclusion, this is further evidence, that the fight will go on, and with such heavy weight one can speculate that a closure in june will be probably an optimistic scenario.
Such a .... stock.
so DMRJ got permission from the court today "pro hac vice" to involve a new attorney. Does anybody know what this means for the case?
For the webpage of the attorney go to (2).
(1) http://www.kccllc.net/imxacquisition/document/1612238170123000000000004
(2) https://www.hklaw.com/Mitchell-Herr/
Status of our "return of invest" (Updated - Repost due to formatting problems)
Updates
* Corrected factual mistake. "Attorneys ... offered $2 million cap Friday on future
regular litigation" (Law360.com) - sorry more money lost from our stock.
* Due to the fact, that the EC attorneys used 1 million in 3 months, the estimate of 2 million
allows us to do an educated guess that the attorneys calculate at least with another
6 months for litigation, which fits roughly to the offered schedule of the court.
* Added a potential gains sections, however not really much valid facts are available.
--------------------------------------------------
# | |Mill
--------------------------------------------------
01|Remaining money on November 29 |+ 15
02|administrative expenses + interest Nov |- 1
03|administrative expenses + interest Dec |- 1
04|administrative expenses + interest Jan |- 1
05|Equity Committee Cost until Jan 20th |- 1
06|Deal of EC (no accrual interest) Jan 19 |+ 0.4
07|Series H Convertibles |- 7
--------------------------------------------------
Money Left on Jan 20th | 4.4
-------------------------------------------------
30|administrative exp.+interest until Jun30|- 5
31|Equity Committee (Fee Cap) until Jun 30 |- 2
32|Deal of EC (no accrual interest) Jan 19 |+ 0.5
--------------------------------------------------
Estimate of Money Left on Jun 30 - 2.1
--------------------------------------------------
worst case 0 - 2.1 = -2.1 (bankrupt no money left for stock holders)
base case 50- 2.1 = 47.9 (maximum, optimistic case)
worst case means: share price is 0.0
best case means: share price is 0.59
Decide for yourself.
Status of our "return of invest" (Updated)
Updates
* Corrected factual mistake. "Attorneys ... offered $2 million cap Friday on future
regular litigation" (Law360.com) - sorry more money lost from our stock.
* Due to the fact, that the EC attorneys used 1 million in 3 month, the estimate of 2 million
allows us to do an educated guess that the attorney calculate at least with another
6 month for litigation, which fits roughly to the offered schedule of the court.
* Added a potential gains sections, however not really much valid facts are available.
Open Questions:
Does anybody disagree with the analysis- and why, facts please?
Do we have an additional mouth to feed, the company has since Jan a high paid CFO,
afaik the company has no income, so it is paid from our money?
Facts:
At the 29th November it was referenced in (A) that there are about 15 million dollar left.
It was also mentioned that administrative expenses and interest cost will eat into this
with 1 million per month (A). This all goes into position 1-4
In (B) the article mentions that until 20th the equity committee activities did cost 1 Million.
Court documents (C) offer a schedule for omnibus hearings until June.
This is why the estimate goes until June.
Accrual of interest was renegotiated according to (D) and is since October 0. This goes into 05.
There are Series H convertibles in document (H), which would be paid first.
(This is currently disputed, but there are no supporting references).
Assumptions for calculation
1. Initial assumption is that ther 80 Million shares. That means 10 Million dollars convert into
a share price of $0.125.(Can anybody convert this into fact?)
2. For Accrual of interest I assume an average of 100.000 per month from October to Jan.
Not sure about this would be happy to find a valid basis. Oct-Jan are 4 months,
so we "earn" 0.4 Million.
3. According to (C) this legal stuff runs another 5 months, so money will be
spent on operations again. therefore we take the same number as in November
and "earn" again a little bit because interest is 0.
4. There is a dispute that the Series H convertibles do not apply. As there
are no facts available, i assume the worst case, it has to be paid.
5. Supporting (C) is the offer of the fee cap of 2 million dollar of the EC attorneys,
which meanch if we use the money burn rate of the EC until January, that they burn
in 3 month 1 million, which allows to calculate, that they estimate another 6 months
for litigation.
Calculation:
* kept everything what was written, deals like the removed interest show up as
earnings here
--------------------------------------------------
# | |Mill
--------------------------------------------------
01|Remaining money on November 29 |+ 15
02|administrative expenses + interest Nov |- 1
03|administrative expenses + interest Dec |- 1
04|administrative expenses + interest Jan |- 1
05|Equity Committee Cost until Jan 20th |- 1
06|Deal of EC (no accrual interest) Jan 19 |+ 0.4
07|Series H Convertibles |- 7
--------------------------------------------------
Money Left on Jan 20th | 4.4
-------------------------------------------------
30|administrative exp.+interest until Jun30|- 5
31|Equity Committee (Fee Cap) until Jun 30 |- 2
32|Deal of EC (no accrual interest) Jan 19 |+ 0.5
--------------------------------------------------
Estimate of Money Left on Jun 30 - 2.1
--------------------------------------------------
Conclusion on a No-Win Scenario by EC-Scenario
If they settle in January, there will be a return of 0,055 per
share. The company will be a chapter 7 bankruptcy case at the
beginning of May. This means no money left for common stock
holders.
Potential Gains
A warning before we begin. This is a potential
gain for common stockholders, which is not supported right
now by some evidence publically available, everything is
based on rumors around another criminal case with Platinum.
The losses described above have some factual basis, so
are more probable than the gains described now
Currently there is a lawsuit prepared by EC, which tries to reduce
debt to Platinum et al. The initial claim of the lawsuit was
50 million dollar, though this is never repeated
in the court documents (to my knowledge).
Current court documents (C) and the the Assumption (5) show
that at the earliest time of payout is June.
We can assume that his will be somewhere in between the
worst and best case scenario.
worst case 0 - 2.1 = -2.1 (bankrupt no money left for stock holders)
base case 50- 2.1 = 47.9 (maximum, optimistic case)
worst case means: share price is 0.0
best case means: share price is 0.59
Decide for yourself.
References:
(A) https://www.law360.com/articles/866723/implant-sciences-equity-holders-get-challenge-extension
(B) https://www.law360.com/articles/883105/imx-equity-panel-offers-fee-cap-for-ch-11-lender-suit
(C) http://www.kccllc.net/imxacquisition/document/1612238170120000000000003
(D) http://www.kccllc.net/imxacquisition/document/1612238170119000000000002
(E) https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1068874/000106887416000139/imsc160930_10q.htm
See page 3 of which shows 7000 shares of Series H preferred stock worth $7 million.
Those would get paid first before common stock.
From page 26: Between August 11, 2016 and August 23, 2016, DMRJ converted $7,000,000 of principal into 7,000 Series H Convertible Preferred Stock shares, of which DMRJ assigned 4,401.54 shares of Series H Convertible Preferred Stock to Platinum Partners Value Arbitrage Fund LP and distributed 1,467.18 shares to ED&F Man Capital Markets Limited and 1,131.28 shares to Prime Capital (Bermuda) Limited.
Contributors:
Thanks to:
* iGrassHopper
* int10a