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.
I am not negative, haha. I want this to happen. I want them to come out and say that they are merging with Gallant and that existing shareholders (us and WC) will own 50% of the merged company and Gallant will own the other half. Obviously those are example ownership percentages, but you get what I'm saying.
That would be great news and it would clarify everything that we want to know. Once that's announced then we can all sit back and relax. They will manage the company and start generating significant revenues. Their long-term goal will be to get bought out by a large food manufacturer and we will make a lot of money.
Existing SOUP shareholders own none of the assets that will make soup. Literally no soup for us.
If we don't merge with Gallant then we own a shell. Gallant is not going to just merge with us and not expect shares in return.
How do people not get this? Once again, I am long and believe merging is a great outcome. The other option is that they don't merge with us and we are still owners of a shell. No cancellation, but also no revenue generating assets. That said, I do not think that will not happen based on the press release yesterday. They wouldn't have issued it if the plan wasn't to merge.
I never said hurt. I said restructure so that we own less of the company.
Wanna know what would hurt the employees? Filing for chapter 11 and having an asset sale where they lose their job. I think it's very GOOD for employees to come in and save their job and tell them that it only comes at the cost of owning a bit less of the company (if they own shares).
The company they own is now completely debt free and ready to make money.
I don't get why people are bashing me for saying there will be a restructure. I am long and I am fine with the restructure. We now own a company that has zero debt and a management team that is cutting costs and will make us a lot of money. Of course we're going to own a bit less of the resulting company but the revenues it will generate will surpass the POS old SOUP that had to file for chapter 11.
So what did Gallant get for paying off the debt?
It's typically the case that commons get cancelled and sometimes commons get a portion of the new co. So I'm not sure what you're saying. There has never been a case where a third party comes in and pays off the debt and the share structure remains the exact same. Why would they pay for us? lol
And don't say because WC owns 51% of the shares because that still doesn't answer it. You don't save a company that you own half of without expecting a bigger piece of the pie.
I still think we're good but there WILL be a share restructure.
That's all fine and dandy. The real question though is what's the share structure going to look like? It doesn't just remain as is. I'm not worried because of WC's ownership in the commons. That said, there will still be a share restructure.
To put it in simple terms, WC paid $6.7 Million to clean up the balance sheet. Since they don't own the whole company there needs to be a restructure so that the other shareholders (us) are helping to pay for it. The only way that can happen is if our overall ownership is reduced.
In bankruptcy cases like this new shares are often issued and it enables a restructure. Maybe commons get 1 for 2 and Gallant gets 50% of the new shares. That would mean Gallant/WC own 75% of the new shares and the rest of us own 25%.
I'm just spitballing here. Something is going to happen. Regardless I think we're good. I'd rather own less of a company with a clean balance sheet and great management than a company that's so riddled with debt and poor management skills that it has to file for chapter 11!!!!
I'm not bashing as I'm long. I'm just being realistic. Gallant didn't just swoop in and pay that money to save us. They need to be compensated.
Exactly!
MM's probably loved today since they were able to stop the run and walk it down. I'm sure they're loading the boat now for what's coming.
lol great response
Not bashing you at all, but do you have proof that it isn't theirs? I'm interested to hear both sides of the story.
I mean, that link was posted by multiple people before the market even opened. Why aren't mods stickying anything?
400-500% is huge upside. They weren't expecting 2000% gains.
You don't know what you're talking about. I hate when people say "hedge funds" like they know what they're saying. Most money is not made in 10X moves. It's a series of hedged investments that derisk each other and provide decent returns. This typically means pairing gains with losses of equal or lesser value.
A hedge fund that has an annual performance of 60% is absolutely top of its class. They do not make 1000% on almost ANY of their investments.
It was put out under the ticker. I first saw it this morning on my broker site which only picks it up based on how they file it. It was filed in reference to SOUPQ so we're good.
They spent 2 Mill for SOUPQ shares and 6.7 Mill for the asset purchase. Around $8.5 million in total. It will NOT go to a dollar but they should make a few hundred percent ROI. I wouldn't be surprised if it runs to $0.10.
Even if there was no dilution it’s not a 300 million dollar company!
They just said they would trim expenses but that doesn’t make your value go bonanza.
Settle for a 30 to 40 million dollar business? lol are you kidding me. That's a pretty good ROI if you ask me. A 400% return is pretty solid for big money.
Are you back in this?!
UPDATE FROM GALLANT:
Soupman, Inc. (the "company"), owner of the Original Soupman brand, emerged from bankruptcy on September 8, 2017, with a clean balance sheet and a new management team committed to living up to the brand's value.
The brand, created in 1984 by Al Yegenah and made famous by Seinfeld in 1995, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection on June 13, 2017, as a result of overbearing legacy liabilities and corporate governance issues.
After an arduous legal battle, Gallant Brands, Inc. ("GBI"), led by shareholders of the public entity acquired the assets of Soupman, Inc. from bankruptcy, eliminating over $11 million in debt and trade liabilities.
"We are selling great soup, and we're going to sell a lot more," said Joseph Hagan, president of GBI when asked if the business would continue operations. "A new regime is poised to finally capitalize on this brand's colossal value."
Hagan continues:
"I am proud of the collective efforts of our team. We have all worked diligently to avoid interruption in operations and to identify those business opportunities that move our business forward. We are especially pleased to have the support of our long-term shareholders, vendors, suppliers, franchisees, and our customers. Their patience and commitment through this transitional period for Soupman has been pivotal in our re-emergence. We look forward to keeping the public informed of our streamlined business model, new customers, and exciting new opportunities."
About Gallant Brands, Inc.
Gallant Brands, Inc. (GBI) was founded with the specific purpose of purchasing Soupman, Inc. assets and operating the company under new management. GBI has identified one critical employee and has engaged a team of financial and food industry veterans with over 100 years' experience collectively as its management team. With an emphasis on strong cash flow, the Gallant team will implement simple operational changes, capable of saving the business over $1.2 million per year in spending while aggressively pursuing new business opportunities. Gallant is committed to communication, transparency, and accountability with the Soupman, Inc. constituents.
View original content:http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/soupman-inc-emerges-from-bankruptcy-300527223.html
SOURCE Gallant Brands, Inc.
https://rt.prnewswire.com/rt.gif?NewsItemId=PH01207&Transmission_Id=201709280817PR_NEWS_USPR_____PH01207&DateId=20170928
THey might consider buying the SOUP assets from Gallant that they purchased but they have no interest in the remaining SOUPQ company. Why would they?
Or were you saying they should have outbid Gallant back on the auction block?
Why would it be over 10 cents? What merits that kind of valuation?
They’re going into Bitcoin?!
Why would it run that high? That makes no sense for it to run that high when they don't own a product with future growth. They are a shell with a maximum value that is below 10 cents.
If Gallant proposes an RTO then yes it can run, but just dropping the Q wouldn't make it run up that far. Unless there are clueless traders out there that don't understand the value of a company. This one is not worth $40 million in its current state.
They also cannot do another RS as the AS is already maxed out. We're looking good!!!
Also, revs from this crop will be used to pay back notes so I don't see anymore dilution happening....ever!
Why do you keep saying this is a scam? Where is the evidence to back it up.
Here's evidence that it is NOT a scam. A link to a Market Wired press release. Pretty sure you'd get in a whole lot of trouble with the SEC and probably put in jail if you were publishing official PR's that were fake.
AZFL LONG
http://www.marketwired.com/press-release/amazonas-florestal-ltd-announced-today-that-companys-subsidiary-amazon-hemp-ltd-has-otc-pink-azfl-2234642.htm
You’re delusional. Please explain to me what has happened?
You’re probably right that they will buy it from WC/Gallant. Not the existing SOUPQ shareholders though. SOUPQ shares don’t entitle you to any of the assets Campbell’s would be interested in.
What money are you referring to?
That's essentially the only reason this thing has a chance. They don't even need to buy the other 10%. They just need to propose an RTO with good terms and all shareholders would vote for it.
You used the email as an opportunity to shake people out of this. You probably bought a bunch today and then now you're trying to set up for tomorrow by singing a different tune.
You probably don't even know what investing is, you just try to play people out of their money.
It's gross.
This is one of the most manipulated boards AND stocks I've ever seen. I honestly have no idea who is truthful on this board and a few people are exploiting the lack of clarity in this situation.
OMG!!! Stock Predictor is saying it's going up!!!!
Everyone sell!!!! haha but don't.
That makes much more sense. I'm in a very similar situation. Holding some lottery ticket shares to potentially recoup my losses if this pops.
This has been a horrible lesson for me. I should've listened to my gut.
Are you a buyer at that level?
Do you mean 390,000?
39,000 is pretty small. If that's what you're upset about then get to the back of the line. There are a lot of people who have lost MUCH more lol.
Does anyone know how much WC actually spent on their shares of SOUPQ?
So many people say how they would never just let those shares become worthless but how much did they actually spend on them?
The most confusing part of all this is the fact that Freedman owns a large portion personally. If it weren't for that I would have thought there was a 100% chance commons would become worthless. With that piece of info I'm thinking 80%. The upside is huge, and the downside is zero.
I think that was referring to their initial takeover attempt. Once that failed the statement no longer holds any value as they went to plan b and bought the assets using Gallant.
Why do you think a PR would drop any second?
They technically don't need to put out any PR. They don't run SOUPQ.
SOUPQ could put out a PR that says WC/Gallant has offered to merge Gallant Brands in an RTO and set the terms, but WC doesn't owe shareholders anything. They ARE a shareholder of SOUPQ, but that's irrelevant when we're talking about Gallant.
The one thing that doesn't make sense to me is when is WC able to sell their shares of SOUPQ? Is there a hold period or something? If that date has passed and they still have dumped their shares then it would point to the merger as a potential route.
There are a few kinds of people on this board. There are those who are just trash talking but don't confuse valid questions for trash talking. I'm an investor but I'm still running the various scenarios through my mind. I think the outcome will be great, but it's not a sure thing yet. We need confirmation on the future plans for SOUPQ.
You don't force an RTO, you propose it. They would be proposing it to SOUPQ management and state the terms. SOUPQ shareholders would then vote on it. TYpically you RTO a company that has a majority owner so the vote doesn't even need to happen (which they can do here).
You would state terms such as "existing shareholders will own 25% of the new company, and Gallant will own 75%."
If there are 25,000 current shares, then 75,000 new shares would be issues to Gallant.
The "technical" ownership is complicated because WC owns gallant so they would technically own the 75%, and half of the 25% since they are existing shareholders.