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.
BRIEF-Biovie Inc Says Common Stock Has Been Approved For Listing On Nasdaq Capital Market Under Symbol BIVI
BY Reuters
— 5:18 PM ET 08/08/2019
Aug 8 (Reuters) - Biovie Inc ( BIVI )
* BIOVIE INC ( BIVI ) - COMMON STOCK HAS BEEN APPROVED FOR LISTING ON NASDAQ CAPITAL MARKET UNDER SYMBOL BIVI Source: http://bit.ly/2YvCDWe Further company coverage:
No volume last two days. Anyone know why? Very odd pattern.
S-1 Filed for potential NASDAQ uplisting:
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1580149/000152013819000127/bivi-20190426_s1.htm
So this is their first R/S so IMO, they intend to uplist to NASDAQ most likely due to wanting to be more visible to more investors (with quality too) in order to raise more capital, possibly because they know Phase 3 is going to be very expensive (as per the norm in biotech). But wouldn't that mean they are tipping to the market then that Phase 2 (2 and 2A) went well???
Now if there were reverse split history in the past, it is a completely different ball game as to why they would be reverse splitting - most likely for negative reasons from trial results.
20 plus years financing I've seen it all...pennyland, VC, PE, whatever equity financing a co takes on does not necessarily
stipulate you need debt to finance. You're assuming at this point... Y not rather discuss what kinds of companies makes sense to take on debt...some do need it some don't.
Yup - the address and phone is the registered agent company called Registered Agents Inc. Quick business formation 101 for those not familiar - a business entity can state their own address/ph # on their SOS registration or hire a 3rd party to do so thereby that 3rd party (Registered Agents Inc in this case) will use their address in the forming business' SOS registration.
Imagine how many companies have paid Registered Agents Inc to help them form and therefore all the addresses for those businesses on the state SOS registration are the same!!! But highly highly highly unlikely they are the same company!!!! LOL.
Just Google services like Legal Zoom or Corporate Services....I'm sure ppl have heard of those household name registered agent service companies.
Yeah, I agree with that article and ESL Investments Inc should have access to the NOLs and maybe already interpreted as having the NOLs as the 13D states ESL Investments et al. (other Eddie related entities) is a 73.5% (obvious majority) common shareholder. As such wouldn't ESL receive the potential beneficial value of the NOLs (as a COMMON SHAREHOLDER) and if Joe Shmo is a common shareholder why in the world would Joe not also benefit as a COMMON SHAREHOLDER? If that statement is way off, somebody please chime in as to why.
Question is what and when will there be a transaction to put the NOLs to use - will a profitable Eddie entity be reverse merged into $SHLDQ? Innovel arm was making money under Sears - could there be spinoff to put that entity in $SHLDQ and/or could a slimmed down, potentially profitable "new Sears" that's currently in Tranform Co be reversed into there? POR should tell all.
and that ("benefit") could be determined as "self-dealing" meaning penalties more than likely would be assessed. It won't be self-dealing I believe if however minority shareholders also receive the benefit.
Eric Moore SA article on Sears - just read it if you want to go long. May help your decision or not. Been posted here a few times.
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4234151-sears-holdings-missed-big-short-miss-big-long
Text version if you can't read the whole thing:
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:Icm-ne4t6Y0J:https://seekingalpha.com/article/4234151-sears-holdings-missed-big-short-miss-big-long&hl=en&gl=us&strip=1&vwsrc=0
And Shyguy, thanks for reminding everyone of the opportunities here.
$SGYP - they got permission to stay on NASDAQ on 2/5/19 even though they are in Chp 11
Case law. Thank you for throwing this out there. Those nice shelves of case law books in firms aren't there to look pretty. Firms use those (more realistically Lexis now) to reference similar cases to avoid reinventing the wheel too much when they opine their decisions (although they do still need to collect their billables)
A bonus here is what you and others on this board have said about the same bk firm representing SHLDQ that has represented other bks with the outcomes we are speculating on in regards to commons intacts/NOL assets, etc.
FASB 109 - NOLs (aka deferred tax asset) may not need to be reported (meaning no valuation allowance needs to be calculated for the balance sheet) if determined 50% or more probability some or all NOLs will be utilized to generate tax savings. Who knows, tax accounts could be working on the probability analysis as we speak? Sounds like that would be a complex calculation.
So I would say yeah a clean shell, cleansed of debt but with possibly of a few billion in NOLs you won't see or be able to calculate and reconcile at the moment based on those bk numbers we've been reading in press ($5.2B bid, etc.). Up coming earnings report may shed some light and speak to the NOL probability analysis and maybe the est actual NOL amt (assuming NOLs are indeed still in SHLDQ).
thelionwarrior - thank you for making that part clear. was reading what rc1968 was posting/linking and for some reason rc1968 didn't mention the two elements of exemption, which i actually brought up/speculated at a high level last friday (post 25825) before everyone got deep on the NOL discussion.
if both elements check out, only written off interest prior 3 tax years reduce the NOL - let me know if that's not correct based on the woodllp info.
Just checked my Fidelity and it too has "com".
I wouldn't have noticed if you didn't call that out - thanks....not sure what that all means though.
Congrats. Do you still have interest in this stock and if so any specific facts (please cite from SEC doc) to prove your post?
That's pretty accurate and imo all but intentional by Ed as his master plan since Kmart.
Might make sense of what I said if you put everything together by reading MrMadess sticky,the Oct 2018 Bloomberg article by Misyrlena Egkolfopoulou (~blue~ posted it in #26417), and Jan 17 2019 SA article by Eric Moore (posted by north007 in #26420).
Read it when it came out....thought Moore was maybe drinking Lampert's Kool Aide hard, not so much anymore after what actually has transpired since then. And man, that first 3 sentence of his conclusion could be interpreted as very powerful for investors whether you're short or long.
Gotcha. Would you agree or disagree that the use of "zombie shell" or "empty shell" is not accurate?
Important to note the NOL cap exemptions allowed for Chp 11 cases
Publicly traded NOL shell.
I believe that is what we may have here in what will be SHLDs newest form. Assets in SHLD are literally invisible (no tools or appliances - those all went Transform Holdco). The rather large Sears NOL is the asset (which I believe you won't see on any quarterly reporting??), which is called a deferred tax asset (DTA) on SHLDs books.
But long story short whomever has been mentioning that common share holders have to be intact to access the NOLs is correct and because SHLD went into Chp 11, the caps on NOL are exempt.
Also, has anyone thought about a reverse merger whereby Tranform Holdco buys SHLDQ to access the NOLs to offset potential losses from actual retail operations down the road?
Am I close on these assumptions? I am not a attorney and only have asked my bk research buddies on what they've seen in the past.
Also, why is the price rising on the 12/15/19 SHLWQ warrants that are at a $28 or so exercise price?
@dragon52 - You missed one pop based on fundamentals - when they actually report a profitable Q4 holiday quarter!! :)
In regards to your post, trying to tie 1+1 together with Mallinckrodt and Oncolix. Perhaps it's the fact the Phase 1 clinical is scheduled to be completed in Feb 2019 as noted in the .gov website:
https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/study/NCT02534922
So, yeah - much, much more to the story??
Then Venus after uplisting?
I was thinking the same but saw more Sears on Judge Drain's calendar on 2/14
Warren - not off to a good start for a run to 2020 IMO. By not supporting Ed/Sears' rescue plan and bashing it, she instead is ultimately supporting 40,000 jobs possibly being eliminated. To be fair, yes some have already lost their jobs due to the closures but what can be saved should be saved especially with that many jobs at stake. Way to go to, please don't run Warren.
I get it, Ed isn't the unicorn CEO but his rescue plan (and I will continue to preach this until Sears becomes a non-profit 501c3 or we banish capitalism) is what is appropriate to maximize current shareholder/stakeholder value. Biz 101.
Thank you TigerInStreet and I'll say it again, well said.
".....It was some smart hedging on his part. But people said it is a scam."
I'll cut to the chase, anyone claiming that Eddie's past transaction was a scam have no business being involved in for-profit business. Business 101 - in a capitalistic world, you will do everything to maximize and protect profits to raise stakeholder/shareholder value within the law and yes, while some tactics to do so seem borderline unethical, Eddie's actions were not "scams" and if they were, let me ask this, would they have been allowed in the first place? Multi-billion dollar deals - they don't just happen on whim or overnight....a lot of people involved to make those decisions and decide yea or nay.
Unsecured creditors or anyone using the word "scam" should carefully think about the choice words they use (I guess that's too late) - they could very well seem themselves on the other side of the court.
And to your point, I just pulled some snippets from that article in regards to Judge Drain's actions during those few days:
“On Tuesday, Jan. 8, Drain delayed the start of a scheduled court hearing, allowing talks to continue.”
“Drain urged the two sides to keep negotiating…”
“That afternoon, Drain called. Cut a new deal, the judge told the advisers.”
“Dr. Drain helped give it life.”
Wonder which way he's leaning.....