InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 12
Posts 1297
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 04/02/2009

Re: TheSummerMan post# 42924

Friday, 05/28/2021 10:07:04 AM

Friday, May 28, 2021 10:07:04 AM

Post# of 47899
hope this is positive, but this from ihub's "toxic funders" board:

We define the financing as "TOXIC" because:

1) Most of these Issuer have no ability or means of paying back the Notes, and the lender knows this before providing the funding, making these Notes predatory in nature.

2) The Notes come with interest rates that often increase through multiple instances of default that represent abusive lending practices and in some cases violations of usury laws.

3) The Notes often include fees disguised as service fees though no services are provided (for instance, the lender gets a $100,000 Note but only provides $75,000 in actual funding).

4) The Notes often contain clauses that dictate how the Issuer must conduct their business, which result in further penalties if not followed, arguably making the lender an insider.

5) The Notes often include default penalties if not repaid before the default date, even though the Issuer and lender both know the Issuer has no real means of paying back the loan in cash.

6) The Notes all contain toxic-dilutive terms for conversion of the Note into discounted free trading stock, often 50% - 60% or more below the lowest trading (or bid) price over the past 10 - 30 days.

In the end, a company borrowing $75,000 can result in a balance owed to the lender many times higher than the original Note ($150,000 - $400,000 or more) because of interest and fees, which, after being converted at a huge discount to the market price, ends up resulting in losses of $400,000 - $900,000 or more to retail shareholders.

ghs is one of them, fwiw