InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 165
Posts 25431
Boards Moderated 3
Alias Born 06/29/2006

Re: loanranger post# 131330

Saturday, 04/22/2017 12:31:48 AM

Saturday, April 22, 2017 12:31:48 AM

Post# of 146203
Courtesy of loanranger

They left something out of their original S-3 filing that they were obligated to include and put it into an amendment filed after the close last night. I believe that the change is all in one brand new paragraph (highlight mine):

"As of April 18, 2017, the aggregate market value of our outstanding common stock held by non-affiliates, or the public float, was $57,211,329, which was calculated based on 50,629,495 shares of outstanding common stock held by non-affiliates at a price of $1.13 per share, the closing price of our common stock on April 17, 2017. Pursuant to General Instruction I.B.6 of Form S-3, in no event will we sell securities in a public primary offering with a value exceeding more than one-third of our “Public Float” (the market value of our common stock held by our non-affiliates) in any 12-months period so long as our Public Float remains below $75,000,000. We have not sold any of our common stock or securities convertible into common stock during the 12 calendar months prior to and including the date of this prospectus pursuant to Instruction I.B.6."


I'm not sure why they filed a $150M registration statement in the first place, but the above basically says that they can't use it to raise more than $19M during any 12 month period. That limitation (1/3 of the public float) goes away if the public float value goes over $75M, which would require an increase in either the share price or the number of shares in the public float (or any combination of the two) that adds 30% to the current value of $57M.


Somebody should ask the powers-that-be why the paragraph didn't make it into the original filing. I'm pretty sure it was supposed to be in there...the instruction that provides the limitation isn't new.
If there was a press release discussing the original filing I haven't seen it, but there were comments right here in the hours that followed:
"Interesting Shelf filing information,....
That's a lot of 'potential' capital that could be accessed."
"Must mean that NNVC has some big things planned,.... "
"If management was trying to be as crafty and crooked as many appear to believe - I don't think they would 'mount' a $150 MM potential dilution threat right out where everybody could see."

"When Webster and Moffat reveal their findings for all to see and appreciate, I suggest there will be a stampede for these NNVC shares and $150,000,000 may well be surpassed by over subscriptions."

The company hasn't made a peep about the S-3 in a press release...leaving the public, including its supporters as shown above, believing that they had filed a registration statement that could provide them access to $150M in funding when it turns out that they can't access more than $19M worth of it. They should have said so a long time ago....it's almost two months later.



ps. In looking for reactions to the original registration statement filing I ran across this...
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=129241118&txt2find=registration
...so I checked USPTO.gov and the NANOVIRICIDES trademark is still dead. I don't know if the company can file a new application for it but if they can, they haven't. I'm pretty sure that anyone could make such a filing today, rendering it difficult if not impossible for this company to use its own name in commerce. Am I wrong about that?

No press releases for 2 months.
No communications from the company or Dr. Seymour other than a couple notes to "a large shareholder" and his other long time pen pal...nothing on the record for the public to chew on.
Maybe they've been too busy thinking about that complicated warrant deal designed to give the shorts a wedgie.
Maybe they've decided that silence IS golden after all.

Volume:
Day Range:
Bid:
Ask:
Last Trade Time:
Total Trades:
  • 1D
  • 1M
  • 3M
  • 6M
  • 1Y
  • 5Y
Recent NNVC News