I tend to think this statement makes no logical sense. How can stockholders(equity holders) in a company lose their equity stake in a company just because of a revocation? Maybe the stock is worthless, yes, but that person who is the holder of stock still holds whatever stake in the company.
If what you are saying is true, then if all the stockholders lose their stake in a company that is revoked, and becomes private, then who owns that private company? Like I said, that part of what you said makes no logical sense. A company can not just exist without an owner of stock or eqity in some way shape or form. A corporation is its own entity but there is always equity owners of that corporation if it is for profit. So, maybe the stock is not worth anything but it does not change that the stock holder of record when it is revoked would still own that share of the equity in the company as a private company based on the share structure of the company when it was revoked. Do not see any way around this outside of a bankruptcy Renee. That is what courts and bankruptcies are for in the situation....to protect stealing of eqity from shareholders without oversight.
So, if I am wrong, then maybe you can explain to me better what you are saying?
