InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 130
Posts 18112
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 01/16/2007

Re: None

Thursday, 02/15/2007 10:51:45 PM

Thursday, February 15, 2007 10:51:45 PM

Post# of 926
Reverse Merger VS. IPO

When a new company decides to go public they can either go by a reverse merger or an Initial Public Offering (IPO). PLRO chose via reverse merger. The benefits of a reverse merger, as opposed to an IPO are:

* You may receive a higher valuation for your company
* The company does not require an underwriter
* The costs are significantly less
* The time required is considerably less
* IPO's require greater attention from top management
* Typically there is less dilution of ownership control

http://www.businessfinance.com/reverse-merger.htm

The main benefit of an IPO is publicity. The hoopla is all over Wall Street. Everybody knows about it. Of course the Underwtiters usually get millions of dollars to get the word out.

PLRO went the reverse merger route. They did not get any of the publicity that an IPO receives. PLRO did not want to remain unknown forever.

So in an IPO the Company ends up paying for publicity of their stock. In a reverse merger the Company or a non-controling stockholder may pay for the publicity. There is not much difference in either path.

Apparently, some here would rather PLRO stay an unknown Company, that is utterly ridiculous.

.

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.