Home > Boards > US Listed > Cannabis > PAO Group Inc. (PAOG)

You are missing the key difference, in all

Public Reply | Private Reply | Keep | Last ReadPost New MsgReplies (2) | Next 10 | Previous | Next
SooS416 Member Profile
Followed By 104
Posts 6,517
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 02/14/14
160x600 placeholder
SooS416   Friday, 10/06/17 09:27:37 AM
Re: JEFFROCOLETRAIN post# 112760
Post # of 117648 
You are missing the key difference, in all of those company changes, splits and everything else there was one commonality Mark Newbauer.

Mark was the one in control, he was the one changing names and diluting the stock and executing the splits.

Guess what, PAOG shed any association to Mark and any associated assets and liabilities that related to any of the prior entities.

Look at the most recent qurterly report, Mark does not own any preferred shares and it no longer affiliated at all with the company.

Further, from the Q

As of June 30, 2017 and June 30, 2016 accrued salaries for corporate officers were $0 and $285,000 respectively. All salaries were due to the ex-Chairman Mark B. Newbauer. As of May 30, 2017 all New Wave Holdings, Inc. operations that existed prior to the August 24, 2016 merger with PAO Group, Inc. have been divested to the previous management. This includes the credit card programs “School Fuel and “Good Gravy” as wells as associated assets and liabilities. Assets include approximately $105,700 program software, program prepaid marketing expenses and patents. Liabilities assumed by the previous management include all accrued salaries of $285,000 and accounts payable legal fees of

So you can say its the same, but the only thing or person that was the sole reason behind all of the name changes, dilution and reverse splits is gone and all associations have been written off.

As to why use the NWAV shell, well for one it was probably cheap to do so and all things considered the share structure was decent in comparison to many OTC shells with O/S over 3B shares. So an O/S in the 780M range with a float less than 500M was pretty good shell to take over, particularly if you knew you could shed the assoicated liabilities with prior mangement.

Much cheaper, quicker and easier to take over a shell than to do an IPO which can be cumbersome, time consuming and expensive.

So, no this is not the same company at all

Public Reply | Private Reply | Keep | Last ReadPost New MsgReplies (2) | Next 10 | Previous | Next
Follow Board Follow Board Keyboard Shortcuts Report TOS Violation
Current Price
Detailed Quote - Discussion Board
Intraday Chart
+/- to Watchlist