InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 173
Posts 4208
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 10/16/2006

Re: None

Wednesday, 06/21/2017 10:42:47 AM

Wednesday, June 21, 2017 10:42:47 AM

Post# of 346635
I think THIS may be the entire reason for the split.

If Roger has an idea already of a new acquisition, it may be a riskier deal than he is willing to do with AMFE. New acquisitions normally are. It might be a bonanza, but it could turn into a dud. So why risk the potential of the entire company on this risk? You already have a profitable arm, so split the risky potential off into another entity, and make the buy there. Then, if it goes well, the spinoff does great. If it fails, the spin-off dies, and that no longer affects the larger portion of the company, but it was freebies anyway, and if the larger portion is doing okay no one blames you much. You have safeguarded the larger part of the company. Make sense? This spin off allows Roger to buy something he apparently already has his eyes on, and yet not risk what has already worked. It IS a good idea, and it IS better for us shareholders, as now we hvae the potential for a second great rise, but without the risk of that second play ruining the first positive business he has built.

To me, that is the reason we did this spin off. A good reason, but different than the reason most are thinking of. Not to reward us shareholders really, but a SMART move to allow us to profit with a second branch if it works while protecting us if it doesn't work. But done for corporate reasons, not as an altruistic way to thank you. Same result, but different motivations. GOOD thinking motivations. Most investors don't think that deep into the reason. I've BEEN a CFO. I've been a CEO. I look at these things with a different eye. And that is my take on the spin off.