InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 32
Posts 3452
Boards Moderated 1
Alias Born 07/30/2015

Re: gater post# 24233

Friday, 09/15/2023 8:53:29 AM

Friday, September 15, 2023 8:53:29 AM

Post# of 24352
It's certainly possible there was a 1 year clause seeing as there were several bits in the original Agreement blacked out even beyond the price "paid" and the timing is about right.

Technically, the cancellation on the 11th was several days short of the execution anniversary from the 15th but maybe that is just splitting hairs.

Or has been posited, maybe Adam thought some unhappy shareholders might actually show up at the family restaurant and said "eff this, let me out Frank, I'm obviously not getting anything done."

As far as money, someone has been selling shares ever since Adam took over. It wouldn't be far-fetched to think both Frank and Adam may have been participating in that.

And do keep in mind what chemist72 has already been thinking, as have I...

Frank has had way too many mergers fall apart just to recycle the shell again to think it is just a coincidence. At some point the pattern almost seems to suggest that perhaps that is in fact the business model. Just keep recycling them over and over. After all, the biggest money is always when there is a fresh merger introduced. And then it's always downhill from there. So maybe the move is simply introduce a fresh merger, let it die then fresh merger again. None of that boring-ass pretend that the company is actually slowly developing. Why bother when you can just start from scratch with a big pop again?