Topic: SIAF - f anyone wishes to catch up on the facts of the current situation. 1) SIAF, a U.S. registered company, is the subject of a derivative lawsuit in the Southern District of NY; 2) SIAF's CEO executed a settlement agreement under U.S. law (NY or NV); 3) Plaintiffs in the case filed said settlement contract with the U.S. court; 4) the settlement agreement includes language prohibiting further dilution by the CEO; 5) the settlement agreement also includes the Plaintiffs' appointment of a hand picked Board member; 6) Per the settlement agreement, the Plaintiff appointed Board member will have full veto rights which negate the CEO's A share voting rights; 7) the settlement agreement also includes a relaunch of canceled $63mil Tri-way stock dividend to SIAF shareholders; 8) the settlement agreement has received preliminary approval from the Honorable Jesse M. Furman, Judge in the United States Southern District of New York; 9) Should the CEO, a signatory to the settlement agreement, breach the contract by attempting to dilute further, block the appointment of the Plaintiffs' Board member, or breach the settlement agreement in any way, it is highly likely that the Plaintiffs will assert their rights under U.S. contract law and file for injunctive relief, or a breach of contract claim to protect their investments. The Judge has set a hearing for October 13th for final approval and implementation of the settlement. This will be quite a positive development for this long mismanaged company, and its shareholders. Even with a liquidity discount of 33% on the $63mil Tri-way dividend, the value of that alone is more than 2.5X SIAF's current market capital. That, along with the other settlement terms should put the shorts on notice. The Plaintiffs are deep pocketed professional investors who own many millions of SIAF shares in their respective funds. They have the legal contract in place to keep the CEO in check, and the means, wherewithal, and financial incentive to carry out the plan outlined in the settlement agreement. Based on the above facts, at .33/share undervalues this company.
