It's been a while since I've checked in on this board. Hope all the long-timers that are still around are well and have been able to navigate the volatility successfully...
@arper, your points have a lot of merit. To add to your points:
(1)
Sift through the dust and technical mumbo-jumbo and this was essentially a partial early conversion.
(2)
This deal is very difficult to reconcile with Mgmt's prior recent comments about dilution and its cash position.
(3)
VRNG could have paid this down with all cash and avoided any dilution whatsoever, so the argument of "some dilution now is better than total dilution later" that is being touted elsewhere rings hollow.
(4)
Not all shareholders have the same objective. There is a lot of talking out of both sides of one's mouth going on elsewhere when the argument of "Iroquois' interests are aligned with ours" and then concurrently saying that they have to treated in a special way because they are such a big stakeholder.
(5)
It is clear that Iroquois was not happy with either VRNG's performance or the direction it perceived VRNG to be headed, and utilized its significant leverage to extract this deal from VRNG. Not only was the financial swap beneficial to Iroquois in both the short and long-term, but it forced its way to claiming a seat at the table on the Board. Rest assured, their interests are to make the most money possible for Iroquois and they will utilize their new Board seat towards achieving this goal. That is what financiers do. And, frankly, I don't blame them. If any of us were Iroquois or held as significant a percentage of a company's stock as Iroquois does, we would exert whatever influence we could to jockey ourselves for pole position as well.
It has been, is, and will always be a fatal error for retail joes to assume that all TUTs are their friends and that the interests of TUTs are aligned with our own. TUTs that are passive funds (think retirement funds, mutual funds, etc) are fine; but TUTs who are microcap financiers and Hedge Funds who are primarily trading-centric are nothing more than deep-pocketed flippers and opportunists who have the resources to bring a wide array of various financial instruments and derivitaves into play to ensure that they not only hedge themselves but are able to make money regardless of what direction the sp goes, retail shareholders be damned.
Did VRNG have a true bona fide choice in executing this deal? Only insiders know what is really behind the curtain and precipitated their acceptance of these terms, but it is a legitimate head-scratcher and inconsistent with much of the info that is available in the public space.
GLTA...
