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.
No idea to be honest.
Haven't heard different. So I assume status quo until then.
Meh. A lot of people used them.
They regularly topped the list of client rankings/auditor engagement.
Everyone will just engage a new auditor of equally low or higher integrity.
Instadose is no more and tetra is private, so it's an easy pivot.
If you own shares you should have received some communication on the share exchange today.
On the closing date, the purchaser (tetra) shall deliver the Share Exchange Agreement to the Company, executed by the Purchaser to be delivered to the Company Stockholders.
...so I read this as, you'll get a letter in the mail to confirm or deny whether you want to swap your shares...
I could be wrong though, since I am not a lawyer and have never dealt with a scenario like this one.
Section 1.4 of the pre14c.
The purchaser (tetra) agrees to provide all of the seller's (insd) with the opportunity to exchange their presently held shares of common stock if the seller for newly issued shares of common stock of the purchaser on a 1:1 basis.
They also identified that there are 531M shares outstanding.
This all just looks like rebranding.
I mean Antonio Rocco Franchino signed for both companies as the CEO.
Any idea on the outcome?
Or does the saga continue in perpetuity?
Instadosepharmausacorp.com
(USA) corp name.
Looking at whois data, website was created April 11th of this year.
Includes a pic of the new CEO....
Not holding my breath, but also curious to know why they bothered to start building a new website if they weren't up to something.
Anyways, figure that'll be enough to stir the pot on this board for a couple days of speculation.
Link is dead for me.
Are you saying grant is back?
8k.
Looks like an update on JVs
Wasn't that tied to the DRC?
Could just mean they are walking away from the DRC entirely.
Could also be what you are inferring too.
Was wondering the same thing. Last couple of days have had some fairly significant volume (for a CE stock who hasn't reported anything in a really long time).
Think Future For Sure is buying the place?
I think they have May 31 +60 days.
Thought it was weird that they aren't classified as delinquent yet on the OTC, so I went looking in the 10Q.
Found this nugget buried in there:
"In the opinion of Management, all adjustments considered necessary for a fair presentation, consisting solely of normal recurring adjustments, have been made. Operating results for the nine months ended February 28, 2022, are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for the year ending May 31, 2022."
Looks like small investor might have been correct. YE has moved from 11/30 to 5/31
Always happy to help someone learn the basics, sunspotter.
Section 5 of the Securities Act.
Enforced under Regulation FD by the SEC.
https://www.sec.gov/rules/final/33-7881.htm
Enjoy the read it. It outlines the rules and regulations around disclosure.
Here is the accepted outcome of this enforcement, specifically describing quiet periods around quarterly earnings:
Examples of accepted impacts and the definition of quiet period.
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/q/quietperiod.asp
https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/knowledge/finance/quiet-period/
https://www.thebalance.com/what-is-the-quiet-period-on-wall-street-357644
Examples of advisory firms guidance to maintain compliance:
https://gilmartinir.com/what-is-a-quiet-period/
https://icrinc.com/insights/quiet-period-questions-answered-for-public-companies/
CFO Magazine's guidance on maintaining compliance:
https://www.cfo.com/corporate-finance/2021/04/reg-fd-preventing-infractions/
Practical application from J&J, explaining their own efforts in maintaining compliance:
https://www.investor.jnj.com/guidelines.cfm
Again, happy I could help you broaden your knowledge as this was obviously a blind spot for you.
The Securities Act.
Section 5 has been extended to encompass quarterly earnings as well as IPOs and is enforced by the SEC.
Why so aggressive about this? This is common knowledge.
Nope.
The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) enforces quiet periods in relation to both IPOs and the release of quarterly earnings reports. It applies to all the companies whose stock shares are already being publicly traded. Specifically, it pertains to the time periods when publicly traded companies’ quarterly earnings reports are published.
You could argue that their current standing on the market doesn't qualify them for this, but I am not arguing how this applies to INSD. Just that quiet periods exist around quarterly reports with some wiggle room to share information if necessary.
Again, not saying that this is the reason they are quiet.
Knowyourbiz is itching to share, but can't. I'm just more pessimistic given INSD's history of sharing information and it not coming to pass.
What part?
The fact that quiet periods exist or that it's the actual reason they are quiet.
First rule of fight club....
Currently they are in a quiet period. Can't say anything between the time the quarter ended and when it's reported. July 15th is when they are due for their next filing.
...but I wouldn't hold my breath. Hopefully you didn't lose too much on this.
Ya probably. UN changed some of the rules on cannabis in 2020-2021, but I cannot recall the specific implications to Canada.
Congo is super sour on INSD, which is fine and very likely warranted, but there is no point in encouraging the dissemination of old information on an emerging industry.
Encourage the appropriate facts instead of mud slinging.
Your info might be wrong or outdated. I recommend looking up "resolution 539 colombia"
In found a bunch of PR pieces from growers. Below, Flora alone was granted a 43600 kg license.
"April 1 2022, the Government of Colombia finalized the cannabis flower regulatory checklist under Resolution 539 permitting licensed cannabis cultivators with export quotas, including Flora, to pass a mandatory approval process for the export of both CBD and THC flower."
https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20220404005388/en/Flora-Growth-Recognizes-Colombia%E2%80%99s-Completion-of-Cannabis-Flower-Export-Rules-Prepares-First-Export-Under-New-Regulations#:~:text=On%20April%201%2C%20the%20Government,both%20CBD%20and%20THC%20flower.
Not saying this applies to INSD but rather that your info on Colombia may no longer apply.
If I believe Instadose is on the up and up, then this is a subsidiary arm to solicit more farm land.
If I believe Instadose is a scam, then it's a way to solicit funding.
https://co2evolve.com/start-a-project
Makes it clear what the intentions are, despite the rest of the site being a work in progress.
Who in the world is buying?
I get why people are selling.
"EDGAR—Electronic Data Gathering, Analysis, and Retrieval—is the electronic filing system created by the Securities and Exchange Commission to increase the efficiency and accessibility of corporate filings. The system is used by all publicly traded companies when submitting required documents to the SEC."
EDGAR doesn't sleep. It's an electronic filing system. That's like saying YouTube, Dropbox, Gmail, or any other file sharing service needs employees to vet file uploads before they happen.
"The subject quarterly report or transition report on Form 10-Q, or portion thereof, will be filed on or before the fifth calendar day following the prescribed due date"
More likely that the 14th wasn't the prescibed due date for the 10-Q.
To be honest, I thought it was the 15th...but I always get the timing wrong on quarterly reporting requirements
I would think that those people are remaining in advisory positions, so they have chosen to keep them public.
Again, I thought it was very clear that Ed was leaving and that this "position" was just a way to transition him out without making him or the company look compromised in that action.
Anyways, Ed doesn't change the bottom line....if there is one.
Ed was part of the January announcement regarding management transition.
"Ed Borkowski has decided not to accept the position of CEO of Instadose Canada and instead agreed to assume the position as Vice Chairman of Instadose Canada. He will advise and guide the organization as it continues its transition into the US public markets."
On the website they have listed active members of the executive team and their active advisory board.
Vice Chairman of Instadose Canada falls under neither of those areas and is a role to phase him(self) out of the company. There is nothing to wonder about.
10K today is the final litmus test. It's either a business or it's not.
I'd have to check the Canadian shareholder annual meeting documents from October. They were considerably more complete when it came to active JVs.
Note that liability is extremely limited between the Canadian company and the shell, as stated in the plan of arrangement.
My guess is that Terry takes it on the chin, which is also why he was let go.
It's still not a good spot for shareholders. It may be survivable or it may not be.
Agree that there are no short shenanigans. It's fairly obvious.
Also agree that the promo benefitted someone, which is probably why the 10K shows the promo agreement as signed by Terry sometime in September, before the Final Court order was approved, and why he is listed in the class action and not any other specific person in the Canadian Business...like Grant.
Page 32 of the 10K
"On December 30, 2021, Michael Deluca, a purported stockholder of the Company, filed a putative class action complaint in the U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Virginia, naming as defendants the Company and former CEO, Terry Wilshire".
At this point, any article from the promo is not really reliable, so the Congo portion being excluded is kind of moot. The existence of that article is suspect in all regards not just what was excluded.
However the shipment being held in the Congo is noted in the 10K, page 10, under DRC Operational Update .
Just ignore FFS...IMHO
Yes, I do understand the metric system but there are US Tons and Imperial Tons.
I can't remember which one they reported in. 1 US ton is 907,185 grams
I've already said that the valuation was preposterous during the pump, pre merger.
However, if they actually can pull off the volume suggested in the forward looking statements, at $1.56/g...
Columbia is talking about a 1M KG annually. If they can pull off 100,000kg, as they seem to be indicating for June (on or thereabouts) as their opening transaction which was also indicated in prior press releases as well, that's 156M in Net Revenue.
And if they can push 100,000 kg to start...then maybe that 1M kg is actually possible. That's 1.56B in Net Revenue from that single pipeline and that valuation isn't too far off (assuming Net Income is equally impressive).
Those are big boy numbers.
Anyone involved in this right now is just hoping the above is true. So far it isn't.
This is still a developing company and despite all the chatter on this board about a pay day, it should be approaced with caution. Absolutely nothing has been proven by Instadose in the market, at a scale that pays out.
I am a shareholder, so I hope it works out, but I also realize that some serious logistical and legal challenges exist. Not the least of which is the CE.
Net revenue not gross revenue.
That's about 1.9M grams (if it's US tons which I can't remember if it is).
so $1.56/g in NET revenue. Add in the 50% JV, $3.11/g net revenue.
How much does it cost in refining the product to oil? How much on transportation? Etc.
Gross revenue probably falls in your $5-$7 range quite easily.
Wasn't the prescribed due Feb 28th or March 1? Thus the extension?
What are you reading differently?
I'm just guessing. It's the only thing that makes sense to me given the jump of shares at DTC, while simulataneously having a CE, no MMs, and virtually no brokers willing to touch the stock.
A bank or broker sponsor who is willing to back instadose could explain the increase though. Could be prep for the Form 211.
But what do I know. Just looking at the puzzle. All of this should be more clear come the 15th. Either they file or they don't.
An issuer seeking for an issue to become DTC eligible should work through a DTC participant that is willing to sponsor the eligibility process for the security.
My guess, they have a sponsor.
They've got until Tuesday to file on the extension. Won't need to guess once that happens.
Good gracious. You'd think that would have been made more clear. They made it sound like it happened out if no where.
Well good news for those invested cause the alternative would not be good.
Auditor resigned.
New auditor has yet to review anything.
211 requires that a company have current and publicly available information as a precondition for a broker-dealer to either initiate or continue to quote its securities.
CE here to stay, at least in the short to medium run since there are no audited financials available.
I know Congo.
I was replying to a post from Small investor1 mid-month where they asked, "I wonder when we will recieve our share certificates with the .34 extra shares." Based on the question I assumed they have(had) shares in the Canadian Corp and would see 1.34 per share.
Was curious whether the distribution of share certificates had occurred since we are now a month past the merger and no one had followed up.
Small investor1 answered my question on post 3718.
Was just curious to know how many shares were actually out there. Would seem people are still trading the original shell shares.
In effect, since there are no market makers has the merger actually been priced in or is this stock about to see a huge dip due to share dilution when those investors actually have their shares in hand and they can semi-actively try and engage the market?
I mean, the company is not worth 5.32B. It might be one day, but not today.
Curious to know if they distributed the 1.34 to shareholders yet.
Figured that there'd have been some mention on the board if they had.
Mr. Sanders has agreed to resign as Chief Executive Officer of Instadose Canada effective as of January 1, 2022.
Under, ITEM 4. SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT....Notes
Mr. Borkowski and Instadose Canada have entered into an employment agreement to serve Instadose Canada as the company’s Chief Executive Officer effective January 1, 2022.
Easily the least predictable and most dramatic stock I've ever come across.
I genuinely cannot wait to see how it turns out.
Will it fizzle into nothing as it should post-suspension?
Will it's bizarre phoenix-esque rise continue?
Does Grant leave? Does he stay?
Does the Canadian parent keep operating? Are there actually any operations?
Will they merge? Have they merged already?
I have no idea anymore but the twists keep coming.
It's amazing.
What are the odds they actually completed the reverse merger before the SEC suspended the stock?
What would be the consequences?
Just thinking about ways this could be more of a train wreck for the people involved.