InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 7
Posts 1018
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 10/27/2016

Re: Paullee post# 17301

Thursday, 02/15/2018 7:43:39 AM

Thursday, February 15, 2018 7:43:39 AM

Post# of 18730
"notifying the world of "readers of small print""

Who is going to connect those dots? Except me. Might not be true, but I can't find another plausible explanation yet.

"waive such a clause"

Are you kidding? Symantec attorneys would want a clean deal and not have such a big unknown out there. Look how many pages the preferred share deal encompassed and how many pages just for the warrants clause.

Finjan was required to notify Halcyon. Halcyon either exercise on their own or was requested to do so to make the deal cleaner and smoother. Shareholders wouldn't like it to hear of a $X/share deal and then be told it is 10% less because the warrants got exercised. Better to do it first.

"Could they have accumulated the shares otherwise in the market?"

No way they accumulated 2.3M shares in open market. They would have had to file once they hit 5% (less than 1.4M). The oddball number around 2.3M is just what the warrants would come out to. 2M plus around 15% more to reflect the 15% dilution from the secondary offering. It all checks out to be a warrant exercise and brings us back to the question... who pays $3.18 to exercise warrants when the current share price is well under $3?

If they wanted to buy 2.3M shares out of the blue, they would have approached IS or BCPI. I am 99.9% sure it is the warrants.