InvestorsHub Logo
Boards
News
Market Data
Markets
Discover
Discover
Subscribe Login/Register
S&P 500
5,481.34
(
0.31%
)
US TECH 100
19,119.60
(
-0.46%
)
Dow Jones
39,495.20
(
0.88%
)
Brent Oil
85.20
(
1.40%
)
Bitcoin
60,782.56
(
-3.76%
)
Post# of 163718
Next 10
Reply Private New
Public Reply Private Reply New Post
Keep Last Read
Replies (1) Keep Next 10 Report Keyboard Shortcuts
Replies (1) Next 10 Prev Next

ks1977

Send PM Follow Ignore
Followers 3
Posts 4060
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 06/27/2017

ks1977

Re: emptyone post# 149080

Friday, 11/09/2018 1:27:21 AM

Friday, November 09, 2018 1:27:21 AM

Post# of 163718

I have no idea what these SEC statements mean


It seems that SIAF (sorry, I meant "TRW") are "caught with their pants down" and has to rectify the situation (i.e cover their bases), and/or it is a necessary step for the TRW-distribution.

It is ironic that they didn't deem it necessary to file an 8-K for the TRW-distribution, but that they deemed it necessary to file it when the record date was cancelled.

What I want to know is whether this 8-K represents a major step towards the TRW-distribution, and/or a major set-back for it.
Public Reply Private Reply New Post
Keep Last Read
Replies (1) Keep Last Read Next 10 Report Keyboard Shortcuts
Replies (1) Next 10 Prev Next

Join the InvestorsHub Community

Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.

Sign Up