Something I still don't understand, so if anyone has some insight into this please let me know:
There are dozens, if not hundreds, of "zombie tickers" and dead stocks trading at .0001 for years. The ones that make good shells for reverse mergers are the ones with no massive debt hanging over the ticker, no massive amount of convertibles that were given out years before, don't have one or more shareholders that own a huge amount of the stock and aren't willing to get out, and....preferably....have an excellent share structure (ratio of outstanding shares to authorized shares isn't such that a reverse split is basically guaranteed to happen). I'm sure there's more to what makes for a great takeover shell, but those are some of the obvious basics. When a company like Universal Management files with the court to become custodian of a shell, they do so because they believe they can sell it on and make money. So here's my questions:
__What exactly did Universal Management do with SFIO to make it a shell worth selling? A custodian like David Lazar will do all the old filings, so when he sells the shell it is usually "pink current". Universal didn't do any filings. So maybe Universal takes care of existing shareholders to get them out? Ummmm, no. Rich Thomas should have been long gone before Betta4UBrands started negotiating to buy the shell. Did Universal make sure there was no debt or convertibles? If that's all, Bernard could have done that himself, by hiring an attorney and accountant familiar with this stuff.
__if this deal broke down because Bernard couldn't come to a suitable agreement with Rich Thomas, how on earth could that not have been figured out
A) BEFORE buying the shell from Universal, or...
B) within the first month of "buying" the shell from Universal
How do we go a year, only for the deal to fall apart??? And what's the point in ANY of the press releases he put out? Negotiating with the English soccer players? Or the January PR saying things would be wrapped up by end of the quarter, and they're getting into the alcoholic beverage market. What's the point of ANY of that if you're 5, 6, 7 months in and you still haven't been able to come to an agreement with Rich Thomas???
There are so many shells out there. Why choose one you couldn't make work?? I get it that it happens to custodians sometimes. I owned one that Rhonda Keaveney had filed to become custodian, and during the process she discovered things she didn't know and eventually abandoned it. But that's Universal's job I thought. It just makes no sense.
And everyone on here bashing Bernard's credibility, like Ed and Pegasus and I'm sure others.....well, you're right! He's now done this twice as most people know. Who on earth is going to invest in Bernard's THIRD try at this? Not me, that's for sure.
And last thing from me....maybe I missed this in someone else's post, but what is Rich Thomas' game here? If he's the majority shareholder and doesn't want to make a deal with Bernard, why didn't he fight Universal's custodianship play? Why didn't Rich Thomas just file to become SFIO custodian himself? And then sell it for $100,000, with the agreement that he gives up all his shares in the process? He'd make bank, SFIO would be a good shell for someone, and the story's over.
I never thought I'd have more questions one year later than I did when I first bought into SFIO. I'm fine acknowledging that OTC stocks are a gamble, and that sometimes you lose. I don't expect to win everytime I invest in a shell. But I do expect to understand WHY things go the way they do. This one is just bizarre to me.
Well that's my rant for the day. Time to decide if I should sell my shares and put the money to better use, or hold in case someone does make a deal with Rich Thomas or Universal or whoever and SFIO becomes in play again......
